Hi, OK, I take back my -1. I don't want to block the release.
Regards, Thomas On 10/07/14 16:06, "Marcel Reutegger" <[email protected]> wrote: >Hi Thomas, > >I agree this should be fixed as soon as possible. But given this >release also contains quite a number of fixes that are beneficial >for many users of Oak, I think we should still release it. As you >mentioned with Java 7 the issue is probably not that severe. > >WDYT? > >Regards > Marcel > >Since we also have the Java 7 alternative > >On 10/07/14 14:40, "Thomas Mueller" <[email protected]> wrote: > >>Hi, >> >>I'm afraid I can't give +1 in this case, sorry. >> >> >>[X] -1 Do not release this package because... >> >> >>I can't recommend anybody to use Oak 1.0.2, because of severe performance >>degradation. Personally, I would feel more comfortable if we first fix >>those problems, and then release Oak 1.0.3. To avoid Oak getting a really >>bad reputation. >> >> >>I think I found one of the problematic performance degradations, it is >>OAK-1703 ("Improve warning logged on concurrent Session access"). The >>problem is that every time a SessionDelegate is created (and that seems >>to >>be very common), a new Exception is created, which is very slow in Java >>due to fillInStackTrace. I think Java 7 will at some point stop filling >>in >>the stack trace, but many are still using Java 6. >> >>There seems to be a second performance degradation related to updating >>ordered indexes. I don't know exactly what the problem is (somewhere in >>AsyncIndexUpdate - OrderedPropertyIndexEditor.leave). At least there is a >>workaround: don't use ordered indexes. >> >>Regards, >>Thomas >> >> >> >> >> >>On 10/07/14 09:55, "Thomas Mueller" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>>Hi, >>> >>>All tests OK on my side. >>> >>>I wonder, should we release Oak 1.0.2 if there is a large performance >>>regression in the AsyncIndex update? So far I have no hard evidence that >>>this is the case (somebody else tested it but didn't provide the >>>profiling >>>data so far). I would probably release Oak 1.0.2, then work on the >>>regression, and release Oak 1.0.3 once it is fixed? >>> >>>Regards, >>>Thomas >>> >>> >>>On 09/07/14 22:08, "Michael Dürig" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>>On 9.7.14 6:06 , Alex Parvulescu wrote: >>>>> [x] +1 Release this package as Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.0.2 >>>> >>>>Michael >>> >> >
