[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-4279?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15312058#comment-15312058
]
Alex Parvulescu commented on OAK-4279:
--------------------------------------
bq. Do we still need Compactor#setContentEqualityCheck and related?
yes, I think we still need it for the backup case. RecordIds will get rewritten
on the backup instance, so we need a content comparison method to figure out if
there are changes or not, otherwise the compactor will simply rewrite
everything again. Don't have a test case for this yet, I'll look into it after
we sort out the RecordCache thing.
> Rework offline compaction
> -------------------------
>
> Key: OAK-4279
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-4279
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: segment-tar
> Reporter: Michael Dürig
> Assignee: Alex Parvulescu
> Priority: Blocker
> Labels: compaction, gc
> Fix For: 1.6
>
> Attachments: OAK-4279-checkpoints.patch, OAK-4279-v0.patch,
> OAK-4279-v1.patch, OAK-4279-v2.patch, OAK-4279-v3.patch, OAK-4279-v4.patch
>
>
> The fix for OAK-3348 broke some of the previous functionality of offline
> compaction:
> * No more progress logging
> * Compaction is not interruptible any more (in the sense of OAK-3290)
> * Offline compaction could remove the ids of the segment node states to
> squeeze out some extra space. Those are only needed for later generations
> generated via online compaction.
> We should probably implement offline compaction again through a dedicated
> {{Compactor}} class as it was done in {{oak-segment}} instead of relying on
> the de-duplication cache (aka online compaction).
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
