[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3001?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15669885#comment-15669885
 ] 

Marcel Reutegger commented on OAK-3001:
---------------------------------------

AFAICS you didn't change any checks, you added more. The additional checks are 
OK, but go beyond the core issue this test is checking. I'm also not sure we 
should add it. It assumes a journal entry is written on DocumentNodeStore init. 
While that may be the case right now, it is probably not strictly necessary and 
could change in the future.

> Simplify JournalGarbageCollector using a dedicated timestamp property
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: OAK-3001
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3001
>             Project: Jackrabbit Oak
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: core, mongomk
>            Reporter: Stefan Egli
>            Assignee: Vikas Saurabh
>            Priority: Critical
>              Labels: scalability
>             Fix For: 1.6, 1.5.14
>
>         Attachments: OAK-3001.take1.patch
>
>
> This subtask is about spawning out a 
> [comment|https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-2829?focusedCommentId=14585733&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-14585733]
>  from [~chetanm] re JournalGC:
> {quote}
> Further looking at JournalGarbageCollector ... it would be simpler if you 
> record the journal entry timestamp as an attribute in JournalEntry document 
> and then you can delete all the entries which are older than some time by a 
> simple query. This would avoid fetching all the entries to be deleted on the 
> Oak side
> {quote}
> and a corresponding 
> [reply|https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-2829?focusedCommentId=14585870&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-14585870]
>  from myself:
> {quote}
> Re querying by timestamp: that would indeed be simpler. With the current set 
> of DocumentStore API however, I believe this is not possible. But: 
> [DocumentStore.query|https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit-oak/blob/trunk/oak-core/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/plugins/document/DocumentStore.java#L127]
>  comes quite close: it would probably just require the opposite of that 
> method too: 
> {code}
>     public <T extends Document> List<T> query(Collection<T> collection,
>                                               String fromKey,
>                                               String toKey,
>                                               String indexedProperty,
>                                               long endValue,
>                                               int limit) {
> {code}
> .. or what about generalizing this method to have both a {{startValue}} and 
> an {{endValue}} - with {{-1}} indicating when one of them is not used?
> {quote}



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

Reply via email to