[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-2644?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Davide Giannella updated OAK-2644:
----------------------------------
    Fix Version/s:     (was: 1.3.0)
                   1.3.1

Bulk move to 1.3.1

> Lift the 150 character limit on node names
> ------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: OAK-2644
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-2644
>             Project: Jackrabbit Oak
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: mongomk, rdbmk
>    Affects Versions: 1.0
>            Reporter: Felix Meschberger
>            Assignee: Thomas Mueller
>             Fix For: 1.3.1
>
>
> Currently -- as of Oak 1.1.7 and 1.0.12 releases --  there is a limit on the 
> length of 150 characters for item names in Oak.
> This limit seems to be based upon a limitation in the MongoDB MK 
> implementation because MongoDB has a limit of 1024 bytes (I think) for 
> indexable properties.
> I think this limitation is highly unexpected and seems to be largeyl 
> undocumented. For previous users of Jackrabbit it should probably at least be 
> documented on the [Backwards 
> Compatibility|http://jackrabbit.apache.org/oak/docs/differences.html] page.
> The main problem, though, I have with this limit is, that it is based on a 
> limitation of a particular MK implementation and hits through the full stack. 
> I would have rather expected such a persistence limitation to be fully hidden 
> and handled inside the MK implementation.
> Granted this limitation does not seem to violate the JCR 2.1 specification 
> which clearly states in section 3.2.4 Naming Restrictions:
> bq. This definition of JCR name represents the least restrictive set of 
> constraints permitted for the naming of items and other entities. A 
> repository may further restrict the names of entities to a subset of JCR 
> names and in most cases is encouraged to do so.
> and
> bq. A writable repository may enforce any implementation-specific constraint 
> by causing an exception to be thrown on an invalid JCR write method call. 
> Still I think it is a questionable limitation for a generic repository where 
> such names may be auto-generated and thus be quite long depending on the use 
> case.
> I understand this may be hard to fix but would still be happy to be able to 
> have (virtually) unlimited name length again as it was the case in Jackrabbit 
> 2.
> Thanks.
> See also OAK-333 for a previous discussion.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Reply via email to