[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-781?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13645460#comment-13645460
]
Jukka Zitting commented on OAK-781:
-----------------------------------
Looks pretty good. The only bigger comment I have is about the way
{{MutableNodeState}} instances are created and used. The way I see it, there
should only ever be at most one {{MutableNodeState}} instance per path within
the scope of a single root builder; that instance would contain the modified
state of that node and be referenced by all up-to-date builder instances
associated with that path (within the scope of that root builder).
> Clarify / fix effects of MISSING_NODE as base state of NodeBuilder
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: OAK-781
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-781
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: core
> Reporter: Michael Dürig
> Attachments:
> 0001-OAK-781-Clarify-fix-effects-of-MISSING_NODE-as-base-.patch,
> memorynodebuilder-1.png, OAK-781.patch
>
>
> Having a {{MISSING_NODE}} respectively a node state that returns false for
> its {{exists}} method as a base state of a node builder results in undefined
> behaviour. We need to clarify how to handle such cases for resolving OAK-766.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
