[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5590?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15854203#comment-15854203
]
Andrei Dulceanu edited comment on OAK-5590 at 2/6/17 3:23 PM:
--------------------------------------------------------------
bq. AFAIKS this would trigger a full traversal
Not necessarily, since {{checkPath}} always does a traversal with {{deep}} set
to {{false}} [1].
bq. The reason for tracking bad path internally is performance: fully
traversing every revisions from the journal takes way to long.
I understand the reasoning, but it is still unclear to me how this is applied
in the current code. The bad path logic is/will be applied only for the root
node anyway (in a scenario in which there's a problem with it in the latest
revision, its path is added in {{badPaths}} which is checked again in
subsequent revisions, until we find a consistent revision). The changes
proposed in the patch are in line with this expectation and also keep the
current expectation of doing/not doing a full traversal when {{--deep}} is
specified/not specified.
[1]
https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit-oak/blob/trunk/oak-segment-tar/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/segment/file/tooling/ConsistencyChecker.java#L200
was (Author: dulceanu):
bq. AFAIKS this would trigger a full traversal
Not necessarily, since {{checkPath}} always does a traversal with {{deep}} set
to {{false}} [1].
bq. The reason for tracking bad path internally is performance: fully
traversing every revisions from the journal takes way to long.
I understand the reasoning, but it is still unclear to me how this is applied
in the current code. The bad path logic is/will be applied only for the root
node anyway (in a scenario in which there's a problem with it in the latest
revision, its path is added in {{badPaths}} which is checked again
in subsequent revisions, until we find a consistent revision). The changes
proposed in the patch are in line with this expectation and also keep the
current expectation of doing/not doing a full traversal when {{--deep}} is
specified/not specified.
[1]
https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit-oak/blob/trunk/oak-segment-tar/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/segment/file/tooling/ConsistencyChecker.java#L200
> The check command doesn't do any check when "deep" option is not provided
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: OAK-5590
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5590
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: run, segment-tar
> Reporter: Andrei Dulceanu
> Assignee: Andrei Dulceanu
> Labels: tooling
> Fix For: 1.8, 1.6.1
>
> Attachments: OAK-5590.patch
>
>
> When the {{check}} command is used without {{--deep}} option, there is no
> check/traversal being done against the repository.
> First relevant line in code is [1], where a check is supposed to happen, but
> due to a mismatch between argument expected/argument provided, {{null}} is
> always returned without checking anything. The method which should do the
> actual check [2] expects a set of paths to be traversed, but this set is
> always empty. Therefore, relevant code for running the check is never
> executed [3].
> [1]
> https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit-oak/blob/trunk/oak-segment-tar/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/segment/file/tooling/ConsistencyChecker.java#L120
> [2]
> https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit-oak/blob/trunk/oak-segment-tar/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/segment/file/tooling/ConsistencyChecker.java#L183
> [3]
> https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit-oak/blob/trunk/oak-segment-tar/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/segment/file/tooling/ConsistencyChecker.java#L194
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
