[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6373?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16316201#comment-16316201
]
Andrei Dulceanu edited comment on OAK-6373 at 1/8/18 12:24 PM:
---------------------------------------------------------------
[~mduerig],
bq. I would thus prefer the tool to check the head state and all checkpoints if
no argument is given.
The complicated thing in this solution is the {{--filter}} option. How do we
treat this when we check *both* {{head}} and all {{checkpoints}}? Do we
consider the path(s) for {{head}} and every checkpoint present? IMO, switching
between {{head}} and {{checkpoints}} provides more transparency into what and
where is checked.
bq. I would rather fail here to avoid the case where a user believes his
repository to be good when she miss spelled the name of a checkpoint.
I agree with this assertion, but one benefit of the other approach would have
been checking for a deleted checkpoint, i.e. checkpoint is not present in the
latest revision, the check ignores this and continues checking it in the
following revision and so on, until it finds a valid version of it or there are
no more revisions.
[~frm], [~mduerig], [~volteanu] what are your thoughts on this?
was (Author: dulceanu):
[~mduerig],
bq. I would thus prefer the tool to check the head state and all checkpoints if
no argument is given.
The thing complicated a bit this solution is the {{--filter}} option. How do we
treat this when we check *both* {{head}} and all {{checkpoints}}? Do we
consider the path(s) for {{head}} and every checkpoint present? IMO, switching
between {{head}} and {{checkpoints}} provides more transparency into what and
where is checked.
bq. I would rather fail here to avoid the case where a user believes his
repository to be good when she miss spelled the name of a checkpoint.
I agree with this assertion, but one benefit of the other approach would have
been checking for a deleted checkpoint, i.e. checkpoint is not present in the
latest revision, the check ignores this and continues checking it in the
following revision and so on, until it finds a valid version of it or there are
no more revisions.
[~frm], [~mduerig], [~volteanu] what are your thoughts on this?
> oak-run check should also check checkpoints
> --------------------------------------------
>
> Key: OAK-6373
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6373
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: run, segment-tar
> Reporter: Michael Dürig
> Assignee: Andrei Dulceanu
> Labels: candidate_oak_1_8, tooling
> Fix For: 1.10, 1.10.1
>
>
> {{oak-run check}} does currently *not* traverse and check the items in the
> checkpoint. I think we should change this and add an option to traverse all,
> some or none of the checkpoints. When doing this we need to keep in mind the
> interaction of this new feature with the {{filter}} option: the paths passed
> through this option need then be prefixed with {{/root}}.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
