[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-482?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13827771#comment-13827771
]
Tobias Bocanegra commented on OAK-482:
--------------------------------------
bq. in the docu section it seems that you wanted to redefined the rep:Members
node type definition. i would strongly recommend not to do this but keep the
original node type definitions as they are but just deprecate them.
why? those are internal nodetype definitions and are not used by users. the new
definition is consistent with the new membership implementation approach and
the content will be converted during a potential upgrade.
bq. btw: i find it a bit inconvenient if the docu section is updated before the
code is modified. this is asking for outdated and wrong documentation because
once we will produce a final release nobody will have time to carefully verify
that the docu is updated. i will remove the corresponding section from the
documentation.
I disagree. having the docu early allows others to review and rise questions if
the intended change will impact their applications. but if you feel more
comfortable, I'll move it to this issue.
> Group members stored in a rep:members tree
> ------------------------------------------
>
> Key: OAK-482
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-482
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: core
> Reporter: angela
> Assignee: Tobias Bocanegra
> Fix For: 0.13
>
> Original Estimate: 168h
> Remaining Estimate: 168h
>
> storing group members in a dedicated rep:members tree is currently not
> yet implemented.
> - jr 2.x node type definition allows SNS which are not supported in oak
> - jr 2.x node type definition stores members in residual properties, which
> up to now doesn't allow to use a specific property index.
> - the jr 2.x implementation is rather cumbersome as it doesn't allow
> to change the configuration later on such that existing groups can
> benefit from the config change.
> - the node names in the tree structure would rely on userId being equal
> to the principal name, which is not mandated.
> for a new implementation in oak i see the following variants to provide this
> feature:
> h6. variant 1:
> - drop SNS
> - change member-property to a multivalue rep:members property in the
> node hierarchy -> same index as for non-tree implementation
> - config change will result in the member-tree to be created also for
> existing groups.
> - even if member-tree option is enabled the members are stored in the
> default mv property and just have a tree structured added if required
> based on the config option.
> - adjust xml import of user content accordingly
> pros:
> - dedicated property index for rep:members property defined by rep:Members
> works out of the box -> performance of membership lookup.
> - fixing SNS definition
> - fixing confusion of uid with principalname
> cons:
> - not backwards compatible out of the box
> - updating membership might not be efficient
> - we need to add backwards compatible behavior when reading and querying
> existing membership information or provide an upgrade path that converts
> 'old' structure to the new one upon repo upgrade
> h6. variant 2:
> - rebuild use same logic as in JR2.x to build tree structure but include
> fixing the principalName/uid issue.
> pros:
> - backwards compatible (no upgrade path required)
> - most probably changing membership of a group was more efficient
> cons:
> - efficient lookup of membership doesn't work (AFAIK the property index is
> limited
> to named properties). thus we probably need to adjust the query/index logic
> such that
> a property index can be created for residual properties defined by the
> rep:Members node type
> - SNS problem not addressed -> might cause failure upon upgrade
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1#6144)
