[jira] [Commented] (OAK-5506) reject item names with unpaired surrogates early
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5506?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16358016#comment-16358016 ] Julian Reschke commented on OAK-5506: - https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12909901/OAK-5506-jcr-level.diff has JCR-level changes for rejecting the characters. > reject item names with unpaired surrogates early > > > Key: OAK-5506 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5506 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Wish > Components: core, jcr, segment-tar >Affects Versions: 1.5.18 >Reporter: Julian Reschke >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 1.10 > > Attachments: OAK-5506-01.patch, OAK-5506-02.patch, OAK-5506-4.diff, > OAK-5506-bench.diff, OAK-5506-jcr-level.diff, OAK-5506-name-conversion.diff, > OAK-5506-segment.diff, OAK-5506-segment2.diff, OAK-5506-segment3.diff, > OAK-5506.diff, ValidNamesTest.java > > > Apparently, the following node name is accepted: >{{"foo\ud800"}} > but a subsequent {{getPath()}} call fails: > {noformat} > javax.jcr.InvalidItemStateException: This item [/test_node/foo?] does not > exist anymore > at > org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.jcr.delegate.ItemDelegate.checkAlive(ItemDelegate.java:86) > at > org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.jcr.session.operation.ItemOperation.checkPreconditions(ItemOperation.java:34) > at > org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.jcr.delegate.SessionDelegate.prePerform(SessionDelegate.java:615) > at > org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.jcr.delegate.SessionDelegate.perform(SessionDelegate.java:205) > at > org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.jcr.session.ItemImpl.perform(ItemImpl.java:112) > at > org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.jcr.session.ItemImpl.getPath(ItemImpl.java:140) > at > org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.jcr.session.NodeImpl.getPath(NodeImpl.java:106) > at > org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.jcr.ValidNamesTest.nameTest(ValidNamesTest.java:271) > at > org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.jcr.ValidNamesTest.testUnpairedSurrogate(ValidNamesTest.java:259) > at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method) > at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(Unknown Source){noformat} > (test case follows) -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-5506) reject item names with unpaired surrogates early
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5506?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Julian Reschke updated OAK-5506: Attachment: OAK-5506-jcr-level.diff > reject item names with unpaired surrogates early > > > Key: OAK-5506 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5506 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Wish > Components: core, jcr, segment-tar >Affects Versions: 1.5.18 >Reporter: Julian Reschke >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 1.10 > > Attachments: OAK-5506-01.patch, OAK-5506-02.patch, OAK-5506-4.diff, > OAK-5506-bench.diff, OAK-5506-jcr-level.diff, OAK-5506-name-conversion.diff, > OAK-5506-segment.diff, OAK-5506-segment2.diff, OAK-5506-segment3.diff, > OAK-5506.diff, ValidNamesTest.java > > > Apparently, the following node name is accepted: >{{"foo\ud800"}} > but a subsequent {{getPath()}} call fails: > {noformat} > javax.jcr.InvalidItemStateException: This item [/test_node/foo?] does not > exist anymore > at > org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.jcr.delegate.ItemDelegate.checkAlive(ItemDelegate.java:86) > at > org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.jcr.session.operation.ItemOperation.checkPreconditions(ItemOperation.java:34) > at > org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.jcr.delegate.SessionDelegate.prePerform(SessionDelegate.java:615) > at > org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.jcr.delegate.SessionDelegate.perform(SessionDelegate.java:205) > at > org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.jcr.session.ItemImpl.perform(ItemImpl.java:112) > at > org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.jcr.session.ItemImpl.getPath(ItemImpl.java:140) > at > org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.jcr.session.NodeImpl.getPath(NodeImpl.java:106) > at > org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.jcr.ValidNamesTest.nameTest(ValidNamesTest.java:271) > at > org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.jcr.ValidNamesTest.testUnpairedSurrogate(ValidNamesTest.java:259) > at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method) > at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(Unknown Source){noformat} > (test case follows) -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-7182) Make it possible to update Guava
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7182?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16357493#comment-16357493 ] Shawn Heisey commented on OAK-7182: --- I've submitted a patch for SOLR-10308. The patch upgrades both Guava and hadoop to the newest versions. All test failures point to things other than HDFS, but I don't know if HDFS test coverage in Solr is good enough. > Make it possible to update Guava > > > Key: OAK-7182 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7182 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Wish >Reporter: Julian Reschke >Assignee: Julian Reschke >Priority: Minor > Attachments: OAK-7182-guava-21.diff, guava.diff > > > We currently rely on Guava 15, and this affects all users of Oak because they > essentially need to use the same version. > This is an overall issue to investigate what would need to be done in Oak in > order to make updates possible. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-7250) Build Jackrabbit Oak #1232 failed
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7250?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16357220#comment-16357220 ] Hudson commented on OAK-7250: - Previously failing build now is OK. Passed run: [Jackrabbit Oak #1236|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/1236/] [console log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/1236/console] > Build Jackrabbit Oak #1232 failed > - > > Key: OAK-7250 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7250 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: continuous integration >Reporter: Hudson >Priority: Major > > No description is provided > The build Jackrabbit Oak #1232 has failed. > First failed run: [Jackrabbit Oak > #1232|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/1232/] [console > log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/1232/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-7208) Various disallowed control characters are accepted in item names
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7208?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16357068#comment-16357068 ] Julian Reschke commented on OAK-7208: - [~mduerig] - any creative idea how to unit-test this, given the fact that the name checker resides in oak-core, but the functionality to be tested is in oak-jcr? > Various disallowed control characters are accepted in item names > > > Key: OAK-7208 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7208 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: jcr >Reporter: Julian Reschke >Assignee: Julian Reschke >Priority: Major > Labels: candidate_oak_1_8 > Fix For: 1.9.0, 1.10 > > Attachments: OAK-7208.diff > > > Our node name check currently allow control characters other than CR, LF and > TAB. This is a bug according to JCR, names being restricted to XML characters. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-7250) Build Jackrabbit Oak #1232 failed
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7250?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16357035#comment-16357035 ] Hudson commented on OAK-7250: - Previously failing build now is OK. Passed run: [Jackrabbit Oak #1235|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/1235/] [console log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/1235/console] > Build Jackrabbit Oak #1232 failed > - > > Key: OAK-7250 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7250 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: continuous integration >Reporter: Hudson >Priority: Major > > No description is provided > The build Jackrabbit Oak #1232 has failed. > First failed run: [Jackrabbit Oak > #1232|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/1232/] [console > log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/1232/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Resolved] (OAK-7248) Remove deprecated deep option from check command
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7248?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Andrei Dulceanu resolved OAK-7248. -- Resolution: Fixed Fixed at r1823554. > Remove deprecated deep option from check command > > > Key: OAK-7248 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7248 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: run, segment-tar >Reporter: Andrei Dulceanu >Assignee: Andrei Dulceanu >Priority: Minor > Labels: tooling > Fix For: 1.9.0, 1.10 > > > With OAK-5595 we have enabled deep traversals by default when using the check > command. At the same time we have deprecated the --{{deep}} option. > Since all these happened for {{1.8}}, the next logical step to do for > {{1.10}} is to remove this option altogether. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Created] (OAK-7254) Indexes with excludedPaths, or includedPaths should not be picked for queries without path
Thomas Mueller created OAK-7254: --- Summary: Indexes with excludedPaths, or includedPaths should not be picked for queries without path Key: OAK-7254 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7254 Project: Jackrabbit Oak Issue Type: Improvement Components: lucene, query Reporter: Thomas Mueller Fix For: 1.10 Queries that don't have a clear path restriction should not use indexes that have excludedPaths or includedPaths set, except in some exceptional cases (to be defined). For example, if a query doesn't have a path restriction, say: {noformat} /jcr:root//element(*, nt:base)[@status='RUNNING'] {noformat} Then an index that has excludedPaths set (for example to /etc) shouldn't be used, at least not if a different index is available. Currently it is used currently, actually in _favor_ of another index, if the property "status" is commonly used in /etc. Because of that, the index that doesn't have excludedPath has a higher cost (as it indexes the property "status" in /etc, and so has more entries for "status", than the index that doesn't index /etc). The same for includedPaths, in case queryPaths isn't set to the same value(s). -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-7254) Indexes with excludedPaths, or includedPaths should not be picked for queries without path
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7254?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Thomas Mueller updated OAK-7254: Priority: Critical (was: Major) > Indexes with excludedPaths, or includedPaths should not be picked for queries > without path > -- > > Key: OAK-7254 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7254 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: lucene, query >Reporter: Thomas Mueller >Priority: Critical > Fix For: 1.10 > > > Queries that don't have a clear path restriction should not use indexes that > have excludedPaths or includedPaths set, except in some exceptional cases (to > be defined). > For example, if a query doesn't have a path restriction, say: > {noformat} > /jcr:root//element(*, nt:base)[@status='RUNNING'] > {noformat} > Then an index that has excludedPaths set (for example to /etc) shouldn't be > used, at least not if a different index is available. Currently it is used > currently, actually in _favor_ of another index, if the property "status" is > commonly used in /etc. Because of that, the index that doesn't have > excludedPath has a higher cost (as it indexes the property "status" in /etc, > and so has more entries for "status", than the index that doesn't index /etc). > The same for includedPaths, in case queryPaths isn't set to the same value(s). -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-7182) Make it possible to update Guava
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7182?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16356916#comment-16356916 ] Julian Reschke commented on OAK-7182: - FWIW, https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12909788/OAK-7182-guava-21.diff works with Guava up to 24.0-jre > Make it possible to update Guava > > > Key: OAK-7182 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7182 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Wish >Reporter: Julian Reschke >Assignee: Julian Reschke >Priority: Minor > Attachments: OAK-7182-guava-21.diff, guava.diff > > > We currently rely on Guava 15, and this affects all users of Oak because they > essentially need to use the same version. > This is an overall issue to investigate what would need to be done in Oak in > order to make updates possible. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Comment Edited] (OAK-7182) Make it possible to update Guava
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7182?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16354061#comment-16354061 ] Julian Reschke edited comment on OAK-7182 at 2/8/18 12:13 PM: -- https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12909788/OAK-7182-guava-21.diff contains changes that would be needed to run with Guava 21 (but doesn't have compat with older versions yet). Trouble is that solr doesn't work with > 20, see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10308 The changes are: - {{MoreExecutors.sameThreadExecutor}} is now {{MoreExecutors.newDirectExecutorService}} or {{MoreExecutors.directExecutor}} - {{Objects.toStringHelper}} is now {{MoreObjects.toStringHelper}} was (Author: reschke): https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12909461/OAK-7182-guava-21.diff contains changes that would be needed to run with Guava 21 (but doesn't have compat with older versions yet). Trouble is that solr doesn't work with > 20, see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10308 The changes are: - {{MoreExecutors.sameThreadExecutor}} is now {{MoreExecutors.newDirectExecutorService}} or {{MoreExecutors.directExecutor}} - {{Objects.toStringHelper}} is now {{MoreObjects.toStringHelper}} > Make it possible to update Guava > > > Key: OAK-7182 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7182 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Wish >Reporter: Julian Reschke >Assignee: Julian Reschke >Priority: Minor > Attachments: OAK-7182-guava-21.diff, guava.diff > > > We currently rely on Guava 15, and this affects all users of Oak because they > essentially need to use the same version. > This is an overall issue to investigate what would need to be done in Oak in > order to make updates possible. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-7182) Make it possible to update Guava
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7182?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Julian Reschke updated OAK-7182: Attachment: OAK-7182-guava-21.diff > Make it possible to update Guava > > > Key: OAK-7182 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7182 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Wish >Reporter: Julian Reschke >Assignee: Julian Reschke >Priority: Minor > Attachments: OAK-7182-guava-21.diff, guava.diff > > > We currently rely on Guava 15, and this affects all users of Oak because they > essentially need to use the same version. > This is an overall issue to investigate what would need to be done in Oak in > order to make updates possible. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-7182) Make it possible to update Guava
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7182?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Julian Reschke updated OAK-7182: Attachment: (was: OAK-7182-guava-21.diff) > Make it possible to update Guava > > > Key: OAK-7182 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7182 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Wish >Reporter: Julian Reschke >Assignee: Julian Reschke >Priority: Minor > Attachments: OAK-7182-guava-21.diff, guava.diff > > > We currently rely on Guava 15, and this affects all users of Oak because they > essentially need to use the same version. > This is an overall issue to investigate what would need to be done in Oak in > order to make updates possible. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Comment Edited] (OAK-7182) Make it possible to update Guava
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7182?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16354061#comment-16354061 ] Julian Reschke edited comment on OAK-7182 at 2/8/18 11:36 AM: -- https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12909461/OAK-7182-guava-21.diff contains changes that would be needed to run with Guava 21 (but doesn't have compat with older versions yet). Trouble is that solr doesn't work with > 20, see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10308 The changes are: - {{MoreExecutors.sameThreadExecutor}} is now {{MoreExecutors.newDirectExecutorService}} or {{MoreExecutors.directExecutor}} - {{Objects.toStringHelper}} is now {{MoreObjects.toStringHelper}} was (Author: reschke): https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12909461/OAK-7182-guava-21.diff contains changes that would be needed to run with Guava 21 (but doesn't have compat with older versions yet). Trouble is that solr doesn't work with > 20, see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10308 The changes are: - {{Objects.toStringHelper}} is now {{MoreObjects.toStringHelper}} - {{MoreExecutors.sameThreadExecutor}} is now {{MoreExecutors.newDirectExecutorService}} > Make it possible to update Guava > > > Key: OAK-7182 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7182 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Wish >Reporter: Julian Reschke >Assignee: Julian Reschke >Priority: Minor > Attachments: OAK-7182-guava-21.diff, guava.diff > > > We currently rely on Guava 15, and this affects all users of Oak because they > essentially need to use the same version. > This is an overall issue to investigate what would need to be done in Oak in > order to make updates possible. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Comment Edited] (OAK-7182) Make it possible to update Guava
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7182?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16354061#comment-16354061 ] Julian Reschke edited comment on OAK-7182 at 2/8/18 11:35 AM: -- https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12909461/OAK-7182-guava-21.diff contains changes that would be needed to run with Guava 21 (but doesn't have compat with older versions yet). Trouble is that solr doesn't work with > 20, see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10308 The changes are: - {{Objects.toStringHelper}} is now {{MoreObjects.toStringHelper}} - {{MoreExecutors.sameThreadExecutor}} is now {{MoreExecutors.newDirectExecutorService}} was (Author: reschke): https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12909461/OAK-7182-guava-21.diff contains changes that would be needed to run with Guava 21 (but doesn't have compat with older versions yet). Trouble is that solr doesn't work with > 20, see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10308 The changes are: - {{Objects.toStringHelper}} is now {{MoreObjects.toStringHelper}} > Make it possible to update Guava > > > Key: OAK-7182 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7182 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Wish >Reporter: Julian Reschke >Assignee: Julian Reschke >Priority: Minor > Attachments: OAK-7182-guava-21.diff, guava.diff > > > We currently rely on Guava 15, and this affects all users of Oak because they > essentially need to use the same version. > This is an overall issue to investigate what would need to be done in Oak in > order to make updates possible. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Comment Edited] (OAK-7182) Make it possible to update Guava
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7182?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16354061#comment-16354061 ] Julian Reschke edited comment on OAK-7182 at 2/8/18 11:34 AM: -- https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12909461/OAK-7182-guava-21.diff contains changes that would be needed to run with Guava 21 (but doesn't have compat with older versions yet). Trouble is that solr doesn't work with > 20, see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10308 The changes are: - {{Objects.toStringHelper}} is now {{MoreObjects.toStringHelper}} was (Author: reschke): https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12909461/OAK-7182-guava-21.diff contains changes that would be needed to run with Guava 21 (but doesn't have compat with older versions yet). Trouble is that solr doesn't work with > 20, see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10308 > Make it possible to update Guava > > > Key: OAK-7182 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7182 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Wish >Reporter: Julian Reschke >Assignee: Julian Reschke >Priority: Minor > Attachments: OAK-7182-guava-21.diff, guava.diff > > > We currently rely on Guava 15, and this affects all users of Oak because they > essentially need to use the same version. > This is an overall issue to investigate what would need to be done in Oak in > order to make updates possible. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-7250) Build Jackrabbit Oak #1232 failed
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7250?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16356820#comment-16356820 ] Hudson commented on OAK-7250: - Previously failing build now is OK. Passed run: [Jackrabbit Oak #1234|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/1234/] [console log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/1234/console] > Build Jackrabbit Oak #1232 failed > - > > Key: OAK-7250 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7250 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: continuous integration >Reporter: Hudson >Priority: Major > > No description is provided > The build Jackrabbit Oak #1232 has failed. > First failed run: [Jackrabbit Oak > #1232|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/1232/] [console > log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Jackrabbit%20Oak/1232/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Resolved] (OAK-7253) Benchmarks: cleanup duplications in AC setup
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7253?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] angela resolved OAK-7253. - Resolution: Fixed Fix Version/s: 1.10 1.9.0 Committed revision 1823546. > Benchmarks: cleanup duplications in AC setup > > > Key: OAK-7253 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7253 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: benchmarks >Reporter: angela >Assignee: angela >Priority: Minor > Fix For: 1.9.0, 1.10 > > > while working on some permission related benchmarks i noticed that there are > duplications of how additional AC content is setup. the duplicated code might > be moved to {{AbstractTest}}. > [~stillalex], fyi -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Created] (OAK-7253) Benchmarks: cleanup duplications in AC setup
angela created OAK-7253: --- Summary: Benchmarks: cleanup duplications in AC setup Key: OAK-7253 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7253 Project: Jackrabbit Oak Issue Type: Improvement Components: benchmarks Reporter: angela Assignee: angela while working on some permission related benchmarks i noticed that there are duplications of how additional AC content is setup. the duplicated code might be moved to {{AbstractTest}}. [~stillalex], fyi -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-7251) BinaryTextExtractor should not ignore parse exception - they should at least be logged at DEBUG in all cases
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7251?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16356632#comment-16356632 ] Chetan Mehrotra commented on OAK-7251: -- This convention was a carry over of [Jackrabbit |https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit/blob/407bd5c7803e8518531559d3bf6fa480197e6341/jackrabbit-core/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/core/query/lucene/LazyTextExtractorField.java#L185] way of doing things!. +1 to change that now > BinaryTextExtractor should not ignore parse exception - they should at least > be logged at DEBUG in all cases > > > Key: OAK-7251 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-7251 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: lucene >Reporter: Vikas Saurabh >Assignee: Vikas Saurabh >Priority: Major > Fix For: 1.10 > > > BinaryTextExtractor ignores missing library error like: > {noformat} > } catch (LinkageError e) { > // Capture and ignore errors caused by extraction libraries > // not being present. This is equivalent to disabling > // selected media types in configuration, so we can simply > // ignore these errors. > {noformat} > or > {noformat} > // Capture and report any other full text extraction problems. > // The special STOP exception is used for normal termination. > if (!handler.isWriteLimitReached(t)) { > {noformat} > We should at not skip these errors - some information should at least be > available at DEBUG. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)