> On 21.9.16 8:50 , Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>>> 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?
> There isn't if you configure it that way. It's up to you.
> But this is completely irrelevant here. If compaction would cause events
> to get lost, there is nothing you could do about it in Sling. Regardless
> whether you implement an ad-hoc DYI filter in Sling or use Oak filters.
I agree.

Just to clarify, if I delete "/libs/foo" I get oak observation events
for all nodes that where under /foo with the removed properties of each
node, right?



Carsten Ziegeler
Adobe Research Switzerland

Reply via email to