On Wed, 2019-10-02 at 18:47 +0200, Nicolas Peltier wrote:
> I would love this! i'm sure that ca config is not the only one to use
> getParent() and its null return value though, and wonder if it is
> "ok" to
> mask that potential AccessDeniedException to the developer that will
> make
> use of it without knowledge of its cost.

What I was speaking of is 
https://github.com/apache/sling-org-apache-sling-jcr-resource/commit/f03954d
. Not sure if it applies to your scenario, probably. If you can see a
way we can optimise this kind of access, I'd love to hear about it.

Thanks,
Robert

> 
> Le mar. 1 oct. 2019 à 16:06, Robert Munteanu <[email protected]> a
> écrit :
> 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On Fri, 2019-09-27 at 17:47 +0200, Nicolas Peltier wrote:
> > > Hey
> > > 
> > > realized on applications using caconfig that if you had read
> > > right
> > > only on
> > > /conf/<child>, and not on /conf, each (unsucessfull) lookup ended
> > > up
> > > in a
> > > quiet AccessDeniedException at jackrabbit level, ending up in a
> > > null
> > > return
> > > value.
> > > It "works", but still under performs (exceptions are expensive at
> > > that
> > > intensity). I think that in our context, we can set read rights
> > > on
> > > /conf,
> > > but i wonder if we shouldn't have "conf roots" for ca configs, or
> > > "root
> > > depth" whose lookup is done before reaching JCR.
> > > wdyt?
> > 
> > I seem to recall that at some point we had a way of accessing
> > resources
> > without getting exceptions, just null back in case of problems. I
> > don't
> > recall the specifics, but maybe this API can be used for the
> > caconfig
> > as well?
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Robert
> > 
> > 

Reply via email to