[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3111?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14998344#comment-14998344
]
Tomek Rękawek commented on OAK-3111:
------------------------------------
I created a new wrapping NodeState that skips nodes with long names. Apparently
the [original {{if}} statement in the
NodeStateCopier|https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit-oak/blob/jackrabbit-oak-1.3.10/oak-upgrade/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/upgrade/nodestate/NodeStateCopier.java#L192]
wasn't applied to the children lying deep in the nodes hierarchy.
In the test I created there are 3 cases checked:
1. longNameShouldBeSkipped - whether the RepositoryUpgrade omits nodes with
long names
2. longNameOnDocumentStoreThrowsAnException - what's the result of copying the
node with long name in DocumentNodeStore
3. longNameOnSegmentStoreWorksFine - as above for SegmentNodeStore
Tests 2 & 3 were meant for the research and don't have to be run with every
build, so they are disabled by default.
Pull request:
https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit-oak/pull/46
Patch:
https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit-oak/pull/46.diff
> Reconsider check for max node name length
> -----------------------------------------
>
> Key: OAK-3111
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3111
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: upgrade
> Reporter: Julian Sedding
> Priority: Minor
>
> In OAK-2619 the necessity of a check for node name length was briefly
> discussed. It may be worthwhile to write a test case for upgrading long node
> names and find out what happens with and without the check.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
