> On 21.9.16 8:33 , Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>>> Pushing filters as much into Oak has many performance advantages though
>>> > compared to filter messages after delivery. Also Oak would easily able
>>> > to support the delete use case described above.
>>> >
>> In all cases, always, guaranteed?
> For some definition of "all cases, always, guaranteed": yes ;-)

:) So there is no compaction, never?


> Obviously I'm only speaking for Oak here. Meaning, if you want to cover
> deletes in the way described Oak would support that. Obviously there is
> nothing Oak can do if other resource providers can't cover the delete
> case. At this point it is - as you say - up to Sling to define how to
> deal with it at a higher level of abstraction.
> Michael


Carsten Ziegeler
Adobe Research Switzerland

Reply via email to