[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-4935?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Stefan Egli updated OAK-4935:
-----------------------------
Fix Version/s: 1.6
> support prefiltering of async index updates
> -------------------------------------------
>
> Key: OAK-4935
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-4935
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: core
> Affects Versions: 1.5.12
> Reporter: Stefan Egli
> Fix For: 1.6
>
>
> As pointed out
> [here|https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-4924?focusedCommentId=15568308&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15568308]
> at the moment the AsyncIndexUpdate, via SegmentNodeStore.refreshHead passes
> null in the contentChanged call. This prevents prefiltering from being
> applied.
> [~chetanm] suggested to explicitly run the ChangeCollector ValidationProvider
> in the AsyncIndexUpdate.mergeWithConcurrencyCheck (see [comment
> here|https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-4924?focusedCommentId=15568339&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15568339]).
> Alternatively the AsyncIndexUpdate.mergeWithConcurrencyCheck could provide an
> explicit ChangeSet representing empty sets for all (paths, names, types,
> properties), as really an index update shouldn't generate anything of
> interest for any jcr listener. Not sure if this is always 100% the case but
> it sounds like a bit of a waste of CPU to collect hidden paths (of the
> indices) in a ChangeSet which then anyway shouldn't be applicable to any
> listener. But yes, it would be somewhat of a violation of the general
> contract to have the ChangeSet represent all changes. Then again, we could
> argue that hidden paths aren't included.
> [~chetanm], wdyt?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
