[ 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)