[jira] [Updated] (OAK-6735) Lucene Index: improved cost estimation by using document count per field
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6735?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Vikas Saurabh updated OAK-6735: --- Attachment: OAK-6735.patch Attaching implementation patch [^OAK-6735.patch]. It also fixes a few tests which weren't adhering to new cost estimation based on actual data. Apart, from estimated entry count now being min (doc count for prop restriction field), there are 2 notable differences: * costPerEntry override is gone now - it's 1+sortOrder.size() after the patch * override weight property (OAK-5899) to down-scale cost estimation - the default is "essentially" 1 where the cost for a given field = number of documents indexed for that field. That's a worst case number (since we'd likely be selecting some term and that numDocs won't be subtracting deleted docs) - hence, downscaling should be the only required option. TODO: Add tests [~chetanm], [~tmueller], can you guys please take a quick took. > Lucene Index: improved cost estimation by using document count per field > > > Key: OAK-6735 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6735 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: lucene, query >Affects Versions: 1.7.4 >Reporter: Thomas Mueller >Assignee: Vikas Saurabh > Fix For: 1.8 > > Attachments: IndexReadPattern.txt, LuceneIndexReadPattern.java, > OAK-6735.patch > > > The cost estimation of the Lucene index is somewhat inaccurate because (by > default) it just used the number of documents in the index (as of Oak 1.7.4 > by default, due to OAK-6333). > Instead, it should use the number of documents for the given fields (the > minimum, if there are multiple fields with restrictions). > Plus divided by the number of restrictions (as we do now already). -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-6829) ExternalPrivateStoreIT/ExternalSharedStoreIT.testSyncBigBlob failures
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6829?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Julian Reschke updated OAK-6829:
Attachment:
org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT-output.txt
org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalSharedStoreIT-output.txt
> ExternalPrivateStoreIT/ExternalSharedStoreIT.testSyncBigBlob failures
> -
>
> Key: OAK-6829
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6829
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: segment-tar
>Affects Versions: 1.7.9
>Reporter: Julian Reschke
>Assignee: Francesco Mari
> Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.11
>
> Attachments:
> TEST-org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT.xml,
> TEST-org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalSharedStoreIT.xml,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT-output.txt,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT-output.txt,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT-output.txt,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT-output.txt,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalSharedStoreIT-output.txt,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalSharedStoreIT-output.txt,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalSharedStoreIT-output.txt,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalSharedStoreIT-output.txt
>
>
> {noformat}
> testSyncBigBlob(org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT)
> Time elapsed: 27.921 sec <<< FAILURE!
> java.lang.AssertionError: expected:<{ root = { ... } }> but was:<{ root : { }
> }>
> Running org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalSharedStoreIT
> Tests run: 11, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 93.353 sec
> <<< FAILURE! - in
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalSharedStoreIT
> testSyncBigBlob(org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalSharedStoreIT)
> Time elapsed: 30.772 sec <<< FAILURE!
> java.lang.AssertionError: expected:<{ root = { ... } }> but was:<{ root : { }
> }>
> {noformat}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-6829) ExternalPrivateStoreIT/ExternalSharedStoreIT.testSyncBigBlob failures
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6829?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16225558#comment-16225558
]
Julian Reschke commented on OAK-6829:
-
Still failing for me. Attaching logs.
> ExternalPrivateStoreIT/ExternalSharedStoreIT.testSyncBigBlob failures
> -
>
> Key: OAK-6829
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6829
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: segment-tar
>Affects Versions: 1.7.9
>Reporter: Julian Reschke
>Assignee: Francesco Mari
> Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.11
>
> Attachments:
> TEST-org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT.xml,
> TEST-org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalSharedStoreIT.xml,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT-output.txt,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT-output.txt,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT-output.txt,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalSharedStoreIT-output.txt,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalSharedStoreIT-output.txt,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalSharedStoreIT-output.txt
>
>
> {noformat}
> testSyncBigBlob(org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT)
> Time elapsed: 27.921 sec <<< FAILURE!
> java.lang.AssertionError: expected:<{ root = { ... } }> but was:<{ root : { }
> }>
> Running org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalSharedStoreIT
> Tests run: 11, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 93.353 sec
> <<< FAILURE! - in
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalSharedStoreIT
> testSyncBigBlob(org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalSharedStoreIT)
> Time elapsed: 30.772 sec <<< FAILURE!
> java.lang.AssertionError: expected:<{ root = { ... } }> but was:<{ root : { }
> }>
> {noformat}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-6710) CommitMitigated merge policy should not reduce performance significantly
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6710?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16225210#comment-16225210
]
Tommaso Teofili commented on OAK-6710:
--
some benchmark results:
default MP
{noformat}
# SimpleSearchTest C min 10% 50% 90% max
N
Oak-Segment-Tar1 59 63 68 74 161
876
# FullTextSearchTest C min 10% 50% 90% max
N
Oak-Segment-Tar-DS 1 9861009140322593053
40
# LucenePropertyFullTextTest C min 10% 50% 90% max
N
Oak-Segment-Tar-DS 1 221 221 221 221 221
1
{noformat}
mitigating
{noformat}
# SimpleSearchTest C min 10% 50% 90% max
N
Oak-Segment-Tar1 58 62 67 72 88
896
# FullTextSearchTest C min 10% 50% 90% max
N
Oak-Segment-Tar-DS 1 828 848 94310421125
64
# LucenePropertyFullTextTest C min 10% 50% 90% max
N
Oak-Segment-Tar-DS 1 225 225 225 225 225
1
{noformat}
> CommitMitigated merge policy should not reduce performance significantly
>
>
> Key: OAK-6710
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6710
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: lucene
>Affects Versions: 1.7.7
>Reporter: Vikas Saurabh
>Assignee: Tommaso Teofili
> Labels: performance, scalability
> Fix For: 1.8
>
>
> While running performance tests (internally) using latest unstable releases
> having {{CommitMitigatedTieredMergePolicy}} we observed significant drop in
> performance (OAK-6704).
> The policy, although bad for performance, showed dramatic drop in churn
> created in data store size. So, clearly, OAK-5192 did what it intended to do.
> Opening this issue to factor in drop in performance and then set the default
> back to {{CommitMitigatedTieredMergePolicy}}.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-3262) oak-jcr: update test exclusions once JCR-3901 is resolved
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3262?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Julian Reschke updated OAK-3262: Fix Version/s: 1.6.7 > oak-jcr: update test exclusions once JCR-3901 is resolved > - > > Key: OAK-3262 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3262 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Sub-task > Components: jcr >Affects Versions: 1.0.18, 1.2.3, 1.3.3 >Reporter: Julian Reschke >Assignee: Julian Reschke >Priority: Minor > Labels: candidate_oak_1_4 > Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.3, 1.6.7 > > Attachments: OAK-3262.diff > > -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Comment Edited] (OAK-3262) oak-jcr: update test exclusions once JCR-3901 is resolved
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3262?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16067922#comment-16067922 ] Julian Reschke edited comment on OAK-3262 at 10/30/17 3:57 PM: --- trunk: [r1800244|http://svn.apache.org/r1800244] 1.6: [r1813786|http://svn.apache.org/r1813786] was (Author: reschke): trunk: [r1800244|http://svn.apache.org/r1800244] > oak-jcr: update test exclusions once JCR-3901 is resolved > - > > Key: OAK-3262 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3262 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Sub-task > Components: jcr >Affects Versions: 1.0.18, 1.2.3, 1.3.3 >Reporter: Julian Reschke >Assignee: Julian Reschke >Priority: Minor > Labels: candidate_oak_1_4 > Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.3, 1.6.7 > > Attachments: OAK-3262.diff > > -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-3262) oak-jcr: update test exclusions once JCR-3901 is resolved
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3262?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Julian Reschke updated OAK-3262: Labels: candidate_oak_1_4 (was: candidate_oak_1_6) > oak-jcr: update test exclusions once JCR-3901 is resolved > - > > Key: OAK-3262 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-3262 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Sub-task > Components: jcr >Affects Versions: 1.0.18, 1.2.3, 1.3.3 >Reporter: Julian Reschke >Assignee: Julian Reschke >Priority: Minor > Labels: candidate_oak_1_4 > Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.3, 1.6.7 > > Attachments: OAK-3262.diff > > -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-6884) TarMK disk space check is not synchronized with FileStore opened state
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6884?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16225194#comment-16225194
]
Arek Kita commented on OAK-6884:
Just FYI: It is not visible each time when closing FileStore so definitely this
is a race condition possibly related to: {{o.a.j.o.s.f.Scheduler: The scheduler
FileStore background tasks takes too long to shut down}}
> TarMK disk space check is not synchronized with FileStore opened state
> --
>
> Key: OAK-6884
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6884
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: segment-tar, upgrade
>Affects Versions: 1.7.9
>Reporter: Arek Kita
>Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 1.8
>
>
> It seems that the disk space check is not properly synchronized with
> {{FileStore}} as I revealed a race condition while using oak-upgrade during
> migration to {{segment-tar}}.
> The {{FileStore}} instance is closed while TarMK disk check tries to execute
> and it seems it is dependent on the state of segment
> ({{org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.file.FileStore.checkDiskSpace(FileStore.java:541)}}
> that needs to be opened.
> {noformat}
> 30.10.2017 11:26:05.834 WARN o.a.j.o.s.f.Scheduler: The scheduler FileStore
> background tasks takes too long to shut down
> 30.10.2017 11:26:11.674 INFO o.a.j.o.s.f.FileStore: TarMK closed:
> /data/cq/crx-quickstart/repository-segment-tar-20171030-112401/segmentstore
> 30.10.2017 11:26:11.676 ERROR o.a.j.o.s.f.SafeRunnable: Uncaught exception
> in TarMK disk space check
> [/data/cq/crx-quickstart/repository-segment-tar-20171030-112401/segmentstore]
> java.lang.IllegalStateException: already shut down
> at
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.file.ShutDown.keepAlive(ShutDown.java:42)
> at
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.file.FileStore.size(FileStore.java:302)
> at
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.file.FileStore.checkDiskSpace(FileStore.java:541)
> at
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.file.FileStore.access$300(FileStore.java:102)
> at
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.file.FileStore$3.run(FileStore.java:237)
> at
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.file.SafeRunnable.run(SafeRunnable.java:67)
> at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:511)
> at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.runAndReset(FutureTask.java:308)
> at
> java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.access$301(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:180)
> at
> java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.run(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:294)
> at
> java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1142)
> at
> java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:617)
> at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)
> {noformat}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Commented] (OAK-6829) ExternalPrivateStoreIT/ExternalSharedStoreIT.testSyncBigBlob failures
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6829?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16225165#comment-16225165
]
Francesco Mari commented on OAK-6829:
-
The latest test results don't show any hard failure in Cold Standby. It is more
likely that the problem is caused by a memory visibility problem between
threads. According to my analysis, the field in question seems to be
{{TarRevisions#journalFile}}. {{TarRevisions}} is lazily initialized in
{{FileStore}}, and {{journalFile}} is initialized in the constructor of
{{TarRevisions}}. The presence of {{journalFile}} determines if a flush
operation is carried out or not. Being {{journalFile}} a non-final,
non-volatile field, its initialization might not be visible to the standby
thread. The observed behaviour is that the standby thread sometimes acts like
it's not performing a flush of the {{FileStore}} even if the segments are
correctly transferred. For good measure, both {{FileStore#revisions}} and
{{TarRevisions#journalFile}} have been made volatile (r1813782).
> ExternalPrivateStoreIT/ExternalSharedStoreIT.testSyncBigBlob failures
> -
>
> Key: OAK-6829
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6829
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: segment-tar
>Affects Versions: 1.7.9
>Reporter: Julian Reschke
>Assignee: Francesco Mari
> Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.11
>
> Attachments:
> TEST-org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT.xml,
> TEST-org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalSharedStoreIT.xml,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT-output.txt,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT-output.txt,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT-output.txt,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalSharedStoreIT-output.txt,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalSharedStoreIT-output.txt,
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalSharedStoreIT-output.txt
>
>
> {noformat}
> testSyncBigBlob(org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalPrivateStoreIT)
> Time elapsed: 27.921 sec <<< FAILURE!
> java.lang.AssertionError: expected:<{ root = { ... } }> but was:<{ root : { }
> }>
> Running org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalSharedStoreIT
> Tests run: 11, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 93.353 sec
> <<< FAILURE! - in
> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalSharedStoreIT
> testSyncBigBlob(org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.standby.ExternalSharedStoreIT)
> Time elapsed: 30.772 sec <<< FAILURE!
> java.lang.AssertionError: expected:<{ root = { ... } }> but was:<{ root : { }
> }>
> {noformat}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Resolved] (OAK-6885) Add missing id field setting in CloudSolrServer
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6885?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Tommaso Teofili resolved OAK-6885.
--
Resolution: Fixed
fixed in r1813781.
> Add missing id field setting in CloudSolrServer
> ---
>
> Key: OAK-6885
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6885
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: solr
>Reporter: Tommaso Teofili
>Assignee: Tommaso Teofili
> Fix For: 1.7.11
>
>
> {{CloudSolrServer}} doesn't have the _id field_ set with the proper value
> (default _path_exact_ field), this could make SolrCloud routing not work
> efficiently as it should.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Created] (OAK-6885) Add missing id field setting in CloudSolrServer
Tommaso Teofili created OAK-6885:
Summary: Add missing id field setting in CloudSolrServer
Key: OAK-6885
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6885
Project: Jackrabbit Oak
Issue Type: Bug
Components: solr
Reporter: Tommaso Teofili
Assignee: Tommaso Teofili
Fix For: 1.7.11
{{CloudSolrServer}} doesn't have the _id field_ set with the proper value
(default _path_exact_ field), this could make SolrCloud routing not work
efficiently as it should.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-5635) Revisit FileStoreStats mbean stats format
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5635?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Michael Dürig updated OAK-5635: --- Fix Version/s: (was: 1.7.11) > Revisit FileStoreStats mbean stats format > - > > Key: OAK-5635 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5635 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: segment-tar >Reporter: Alex Deparvu >Assignee: Michael Dürig > Labels: monitoring > Fix For: 1.8 > > > This is a bigger refactoring item to revisit the format of the exposed data, > moving towards having it in a more machine consumable friendly format. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Comment Edited] (OAK-6300) CacheConsistencyTestBase: potential NPE in teardown
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6300?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16034571#comment-16034571 ] Julian Reschke edited comment on OAK-6300 at 10/30/17 3:10 PM: --- trunk: [r1797378|http://svn.apache.org/r1797378] 1.6: [r1813776|http://svn.apache.org/r1813776] was (Author: reschke): trunk: [r1797378|http://svn.apache.org/r1797378] > CacheConsistencyTestBase: potential NPE in teardown > --- > > Key: OAK-6300 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6300 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: documentmk >Reporter: Julian Reschke >Assignee: Julian Reschke >Priority: Trivial > Labels: candidate_oak_1_0, candidate_oak_1_2, candidate_oak_1_4 > Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.1, 1.6.7 > > -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-6627) Backup restore should interact properly with older segment version
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6627?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Michael Dürig updated OAK-6627: --- Fix Version/s: (was: 1.7.11) 1.7.13 > Backup restore should interact properly with older segment version > -- > > Key: OAK-6627 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6627 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: segment-tar >Reporter: Michael Dürig >Assignee: Michael Dürig > Labels: production, resilience > Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.13 > > > We need to check how backup and restore behave when run on top of a former > store version. That is backup / restore from Oak 1.8 to / from stores of > segment version 12 (from Oak 1.6). Expected behaviour is "nothing bad > happens". Details to be clarified. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-6300) CacheConsistencyTestBase: potential NPE in teardown
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6300?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Julian Reschke updated OAK-6300: Fix Version/s: 1.6.7 > CacheConsistencyTestBase: potential NPE in teardown > --- > > Key: OAK-6300 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6300 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: documentmk >Reporter: Julian Reschke >Assignee: Julian Reschke >Priority: Trivial > Labels: candidate_oak_1_0, candidate_oak_1_2, candidate_oak_1_4 > Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.1, 1.6.7 > > -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-6300) CacheConsistencyTestBase: potential NPE in teardown
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6300?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Julian Reschke updated OAK-6300: Labels: candidate_oak_1_0 candidate_oak_1_2 candidate_oak_1_4 (was: candidate_oak_1_0 candidate_oak_1_2 candidate_oak_1_4 candidate_oak_1_6) > CacheConsistencyTestBase: potential NPE in teardown > --- > > Key: OAK-6300 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6300 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: documentmk >Reporter: Julian Reschke >Assignee: Julian Reschke >Priority: Trivial > Labels: candidate_oak_1_0, candidate_oak_1_2, candidate_oak_1_4 > Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.1, 1.6.7 > > -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-5360) Cancellation of gc should be reflected by RevisionGC.getRevisionGCStatus()
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5360?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michael Dürig updated OAK-5360:
---
Fix Version/s: (was: 1.7.11)
> Cancellation of gc should be reflected by RevisionGC.getRevisionGCStatus()
> --
>
> Key: OAK-5360
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5360
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: core, segment-tar
>Reporter: Michael Dürig
>Assignee: Michael Dürig
> Labels: gc, management, monitoring, production
> Fix For: 1.8
>
>
> Currently when a garbage collection cycle is cancelled from "within" (i.e.
> through {{CancelCompactionSupplier}} then this is not reflected through
> {{RevisionGC.getRevisionGCStatus()}} but rather reported as successful run.
> We should change this and return a failure result indication the cancellation
> so downstream consumers get an proper indication whether and which gc runs
> actually succeeded.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Created] (OAK-6884) TarMK disk space check is not synchronized with FileStore opened state
Arek Kita created OAK-6884:
--
Summary: TarMK disk space check is not synchronized with FileStore
opened state
Key: OAK-6884
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6884
Project: Jackrabbit Oak
Issue Type: Bug
Components: segment-tar, upgrade
Affects Versions: 1.7.9
Reporter: Arek Kita
Priority: Minor
Fix For: 1.8
It seems that the disk space check is not properly synchronized with
{{FileStore}} as I revealed a race condition while using oak-upgrade during
migration to {{segment-tar}}.
The {{FileStore}} instance is closed while TarMK disk check tries to execute
and it seems it is dependent on the state of segment
({{org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.file.FileStore.checkDiskSpace(FileStore.java:541)}}
that needs to be opened.
{noformat}
30.10.2017 11:26:05.834 WARN o.a.j.o.s.f.Scheduler: The scheduler FileStore
background tasks takes too long to shut down
30.10.2017 11:26:11.674 INFO o.a.j.o.s.f.FileStore: TarMK closed:
/data/cq/crx-quickstart/repository-segment-tar-20171030-112401/segmentstore
30.10.2017 11:26:11.676 ERROR o.a.j.o.s.f.SafeRunnable: Uncaught exception in
TarMK disk space check
[/data/cq/crx-quickstart/repository-segment-tar-20171030-112401/segmentstore]
java.lang.IllegalStateException: already shut down
at
org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.file.ShutDown.keepAlive(ShutDown.java:42)
at org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.file.FileStore.size(FileStore.java:302)
at
org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.file.FileStore.checkDiskSpace(FileStore.java:541)
at
org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.file.FileStore.access$300(FileStore.java:102)
at
org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.file.FileStore$3.run(FileStore.java:237)
at
org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.segment.file.SafeRunnable.run(SafeRunnable.java:67)
at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:511)
at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.runAndReset(FutureTask.java:308)
at
java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.access$301(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:180)
at
java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.run(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:294)
at
java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1142)
at
java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:617)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)
{noformat}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-6883) The compaction estimator should take the compaction type (tail vs. full) into consideration
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6883?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Michael Dürig updated OAK-6883: --- Description: Currently the compaction estimator unconditionally looks at the growth of the repository since the last compaction run. This turn out to be not optimal when interleaving tail and full compaction. It would be better to have the estimator look at the growth of the repository since last full compaction when running full compaction. cc [~frm] was:Currently the compaction estimator unconditionally looks at the growth of the repository since the last compaction run. This turn out to be not optimal when interleaving tail and full compaction. It would be better to have the estimator look at the growth of the repository since last full compaction when running full compaction. > The compaction estimator should take the compaction type (tail vs. full) into > consideration > --- > > Key: OAK-6883 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6883 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: segment-tar >Reporter: Michael Dürig >Assignee: Francesco Mari > Labels: compaction, gc > Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.11 > > > Currently the compaction estimator unconditionally looks at the growth of the > repository since the last compaction run. This turn out to be not optimal > when interleaving tail and full compaction. It would be better to have the > estimator look at the growth of the repository since last full compaction > when running full compaction. > cc [~frm] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Created] (OAK-6883) The compaction estimator should take the compaction type (tail vs. full) into consideration
Michael Dürig created OAK-6883: -- Summary: The compaction estimator should take the compaction type (tail vs. full) into consideration Key: OAK-6883 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6883 Project: Jackrabbit Oak Issue Type: Improvement Components: segment-tar Reporter: Michael Dürig Assignee: Francesco Mari Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.11 Currently the compaction estimator unconditionally looks at the growth of the repository since the last compaction run. This turn out to be not optimal when interleaving tail and full compaction. It would be better to have the estimator look at the growth of the repository since last full compaction when running full compaction. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-6789) RDB: RevisionGC performance on Oracle
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6789?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Julian Reschke updated OAK-6789:
Labels: candidate_oak_1_0 candidate_oak_1_2 candidate_oak_1_4 (was:
candidate_oak_1_0 candidate_oak_1_2 candidate_oak_1_4 candidate_oak_1_6)
> RDB: RevisionGC performance on Oracle
> -
>
> Key: OAK-6789
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6789
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: rdbmk
>Reporter: Julian Reschke
>Assignee: Julian Reschke
> Labels: candidate_oak_1_0, candidate_oak_1_2, candidate_oak_1_4
> Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.10, 1.6.7
>
> Attachments: OAK-6789.diff
>
>
> In RevisionGC on Oracle, performance of deletes is bad. Using RevisionGCTest:
> {noformat}
> VersionGCStats{ignoredGCDueToCheckPoint=false, canceled=false,
> deletedDocGCCount=92092 (of which leaf: 92000), updateResurrectedGCCount=0,
> splitDocGCCount=1, intermediateSplitDocGCCount=0, iterationCount=2,
> timeActive=7.429 min, timeToCollectDeletedDocs=1394 ms,
> timeToCheckDeletedDocs=250.4 ms, timeToSortDocIds=374.0 us,
> timeTakenToUpdateResurrectedDocs=17.00 us, timeTakenToDeleteDeletedDocs=7.399
> min, timeTakenToCollectAndDeleteSplitDocs=97.95 ms}
> Performed RevisionGC in 7,429 min
> {noformat}
> Compared with DB2:
> {noformat}
> VersionGCStats{ignoredGCDueToCheckPoint=false, canceled=false,
> deletedDocGCCount=96096 (of which leaf: 96000), updateResurrectedGCCount=0,
> splitDocGCCount=1, intermediateSplitDocGCCount=0, iterationCount=2,
> timeActive=8.240 s, timeToCollectDeletedDocs=1780 ms,
> timeToCheckDeletedDocs=259.7 ms, timeToSortDocIds=237.0 us,
> timeTakenToUpdateResurrectedDocs=19.00 us, timeTakenToDeleteDeletedDocs=4.552
> s, timeTakenToCollectAndDeleteSplitDocs=685.4 ms}
> Performed RevisionGC in 8,243 s
> {noformat}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-6789) RDB: RevisionGC performance on Oracle
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6789?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Julian Reschke updated OAK-6789:
Fix Version/s: 1.6.7
> RDB: RevisionGC performance on Oracle
> -
>
> Key: OAK-6789
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6789
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: rdbmk
>Reporter: Julian Reschke
>Assignee: Julian Reschke
> Labels: candidate_oak_1_0, candidate_oak_1_2, candidate_oak_1_4
> Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.10, 1.6.7
>
> Attachments: OAK-6789.diff
>
>
> In RevisionGC on Oracle, performance of deletes is bad. Using RevisionGCTest:
> {noformat}
> VersionGCStats{ignoredGCDueToCheckPoint=false, canceled=false,
> deletedDocGCCount=92092 (of which leaf: 92000), updateResurrectedGCCount=0,
> splitDocGCCount=1, intermediateSplitDocGCCount=0, iterationCount=2,
> timeActive=7.429 min, timeToCollectDeletedDocs=1394 ms,
> timeToCheckDeletedDocs=250.4 ms, timeToSortDocIds=374.0 us,
> timeTakenToUpdateResurrectedDocs=17.00 us, timeTakenToDeleteDeletedDocs=7.399
> min, timeTakenToCollectAndDeleteSplitDocs=97.95 ms}
> Performed RevisionGC in 7,429 min
> {noformat}
> Compared with DB2:
> {noformat}
> VersionGCStats{ignoredGCDueToCheckPoint=false, canceled=false,
> deletedDocGCCount=96096 (of which leaf: 96000), updateResurrectedGCCount=0,
> splitDocGCCount=1, intermediateSplitDocGCCount=0, iterationCount=2,
> timeActive=8.240 s, timeToCollectDeletedDocs=1780 ms,
> timeToCheckDeletedDocs=259.7 ms, timeToSortDocIds=237.0 us,
> timeTakenToUpdateResurrectedDocs=19.00 us, timeTakenToDeleteDeletedDocs=4.552
> s, timeTakenToCollectAndDeleteSplitDocs=685.4 ms}
> Performed RevisionGC in 8,243 s
> {noformat}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Comment Edited] (OAK-6789) RDB: RevisionGC performance on Oracle
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6789?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16200412#comment-16200412
]
Julian Reschke edited comment on OAK-6789 at 10/30/17 2:12 PM:
---
trunk: [r1811931|http://svn.apache.org/r1811931]
[r1811835|http://svn.apache.org/r1811835]
1.6: [r1813766|http://svn.apache.org/r1813766]
was (Author: reschke):
trunk: [r1811931|http://svn.apache.org/r1811931]
[r1811835|http://svn.apache.org/r1811835]
> RDB: RevisionGC performance on Oracle
> -
>
> Key: OAK-6789
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6789
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: rdbmk
>Reporter: Julian Reschke
>Assignee: Julian Reschke
> Labels: candidate_oak_1_0, candidate_oak_1_2, candidate_oak_1_4
> Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.10, 1.6.7
>
> Attachments: OAK-6789.diff
>
>
> In RevisionGC on Oracle, performance of deletes is bad. Using RevisionGCTest:
> {noformat}
> VersionGCStats{ignoredGCDueToCheckPoint=false, canceled=false,
> deletedDocGCCount=92092 (of which leaf: 92000), updateResurrectedGCCount=0,
> splitDocGCCount=1, intermediateSplitDocGCCount=0, iterationCount=2,
> timeActive=7.429 min, timeToCollectDeletedDocs=1394 ms,
> timeToCheckDeletedDocs=250.4 ms, timeToSortDocIds=374.0 us,
> timeTakenToUpdateResurrectedDocs=17.00 us, timeTakenToDeleteDeletedDocs=7.399
> min, timeTakenToCollectAndDeleteSplitDocs=97.95 ms}
> Performed RevisionGC in 7,429 min
> {noformat}
> Compared with DB2:
> {noformat}
> VersionGCStats{ignoredGCDueToCheckPoint=false, canceled=false,
> deletedDocGCCount=96096 (of which leaf: 96000), updateResurrectedGCCount=0,
> splitDocGCCount=1, intermediateSplitDocGCCount=0, iterationCount=2,
> timeActive=8.240 s, timeToCollectDeletedDocs=1780 ms,
> timeToCheckDeletedDocs=259.7 ms, timeToSortDocIds=237.0 us,
> timeTakenToUpdateResurrectedDocs=19.00 us, timeTakenToDeleteDeletedDocs=4.552
> s, timeTakenToCollectAndDeleteSplitDocs=685.4 ms}
> Performed RevisionGC in 8,243 s
> {noformat}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Comment Edited] (OAK-6811) BasicDocumentStore: avoid use of API edge case in test of cache invalidation
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6811?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16200267#comment-16200267
]
Julian Reschke edited comment on OAK-6811 at 10/30/17 12:53 PM:
trunk: [r1811823|http://svn.apache.org/r1811823]
1.6: [r1813758|http://svn.apache.org/r1813758]
was (Author: reschke):
trunk: [r1811823|http://svn.apache.org/r1811823]
> BasicDocumentStore: avoid use of API edge case in test of cache invalidation
>
>
> Key: OAK-6811
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6811
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Technical task
> Components: documentmk
>Reporter: Julian Reschke
>Assignee: Julian Reschke
>Priority: Minor
> Labels: candidate_oak_1_0, candidate_oak_1_2, candidate_oak_1_4
> Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.10, 1.6.7
>
>
> {{removeInvalidatesCache()}} uses a call to the conditional remove method,
> but doesn't supply conditions.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-6811) BasicDocumentStore: avoid use of API edge case in test of cache invalidation
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6811?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Julian Reschke updated OAK-6811:
Labels: candidate_oak_1_0 candidate_oak_1_2 candidate_oak_1_4 (was:
candidate_oak_1_0 candidate_oak_1_2 candidate_oak_1_4 candidate_oak_1_6)
> BasicDocumentStore: avoid use of API edge case in test of cache invalidation
>
>
> Key: OAK-6811
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6811
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Technical task
> Components: documentmk
>Reporter: Julian Reschke
>Assignee: Julian Reschke
>Priority: Minor
> Labels: candidate_oak_1_0, candidate_oak_1_2, candidate_oak_1_4
> Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.10, 1.6.7
>
>
> {{removeInvalidatesCache()}} uses a call to the conditional remove method,
> but doesn't supply conditions.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-6811) BasicDocumentStore: avoid use of API edge case in test of cache invalidation
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6811?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Julian Reschke updated OAK-6811:
Fix Version/s: 1.6.7
> BasicDocumentStore: avoid use of API edge case in test of cache invalidation
>
>
> Key: OAK-6811
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6811
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Technical task
> Components: documentmk
>Reporter: Julian Reschke
>Assignee: Julian Reschke
>Priority: Minor
> Labels: candidate_oak_1_0, candidate_oak_1_2, candidate_oak_1_4
> Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.10, 1.6.7
>
>
> {{removeInvalidatesCache()}} uses a call to the conditional remove method,
> but doesn't supply conditions.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Comment Edited] (OAK-6716) RDB*Store: update DB2 JDBC dependency to 4.19.66
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6716?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16180767#comment-16180767 ] Julian Reschke edited comment on OAK-6716 at 10/30/17 11:42 AM: trunk: [r1809745|http://svn.apache.org/r1809745] 1.6: [r1813754|http://svn.apache.org/r1813754] was (Author: reschke): trunk: [r1809745|http://svn.apache.org/r1809745] > RDB*Store: update DB2 JDBC dependency to 4.19.66 > > > Key: OAK-6716 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6716 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Technical task > Components: rdbmk >Reporter: Julian Reschke >Assignee: Julian Reschke >Priority: Minor > Labels: candidate_oak_1_0, candidate_oak_1_2, candidate_oak_1_4 > Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.9, 1.6.7 > > > (also remove the db2-license jar which we don't need here anyway) -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-6716) RDB*Store: update DB2 JDBC dependency to 4.19.66
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6716?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Julian Reschke updated OAK-6716: Labels: candidate_oak_1_0 candidate_oak_1_2 candidate_oak_1_4 (was: candidate_oak_1_0 candidate_oak_1_2 candidate_oak_1_4 candidate_oak_1_6) > RDB*Store: update DB2 JDBC dependency to 4.19.66 > > > Key: OAK-6716 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6716 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Technical task > Components: rdbmk >Reporter: Julian Reschke >Assignee: Julian Reschke >Priority: Minor > Labels: candidate_oak_1_0, candidate_oak_1_2, candidate_oak_1_4 > Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.9, 1.6.7 > > > (also remove the db2-license jar which we don't need here anyway) -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-6716) RDB*Store: update DB2 JDBC dependency to 4.19.66
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6716?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Julian Reschke updated OAK-6716: Fix Version/s: 1.6.7 > RDB*Store: update DB2 JDBC dependency to 4.19.66 > > > Key: OAK-6716 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6716 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Technical task > Components: rdbmk >Reporter: Julian Reschke >Assignee: Julian Reschke >Priority: Minor > Labels: candidate_oak_1_0, candidate_oak_1_2, candidate_oak_1_4, > candidate_oak_1_6 > Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.9, 1.6.7 > > > (also remove the db2-license jar which we don't need here anyway) -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Resolved] (OAK-6877) NodeBuilder#isReplaced behaves incorrectly for SegmentNodeStore
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6877?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michael Dürig resolved OAK-6877.
Resolution: Fixed
Fix Version/s: 1.7.11
Fixed at http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1813739&view=rev by replacing the
reference equality check in {{MutableNodeState}} with a structural equality
check.
> NodeBuilder#isReplaced behaves incorrectly for SegmentNodeStore
> ---
>
> Key: OAK-6877
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6877
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: segment-tar
>Reporter: Chetan Mehrotra
>Assignee: Michael Dürig
>Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 1.8, 1.7.11
>
> Attachments: OAK-6877-v1.patch
>
>
> As seen in OAK-6876 NodeBuilder reports incorrectly for isReplaced call.
> Following test fails for Segment fixture
> {noformat}
> @Test
> public void isReplacedBehaviour() throws Exception{
> NodeBuilder nb = store.getRoot().builder();
> nb.child("a").setProperty("foo", "bar");
> store.merge(nb, EmptyHook.INSTANCE, CommitInfo.EMPTY);
> nb = store.getRoot().builder();
> nb.child("a").child("b");
> assertFalse(nb.getChildNode("a").isReplaced("foo"));
> }
> {noformat}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Updated] (OAK-5458) Test failure: RepositoryBootIT.repositoryLogin
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5458?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Davide Giannella updated OAK-5458: -- Fix Version/s: (was: 1.6.6) 1.6.7 > Test failure: RepositoryBootIT.repositoryLogin > -- > > Key: OAK-5458 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-5458 > Project: Jackrabbit Oak > Issue Type: Bug > Components: continuous integration, examples >Affects Versions: 1.4, 1.5.18 >Reporter: Hudson >Assignee: Chetan Mehrotra > Labels: test-failure, ubuntu > Fix For: 1.8, 1.4.19, 1.6.7 > > Attachments: unit-tests-1379.log > > > Jenkins CI failure: > https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/ > The build Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK 1.8 > (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=integrationTesting #1369 has failed. > First failed run: [Apache Jackrabbit Oak matrix/Ubuntu Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK > 1.8 (latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=integrationTesting > #1369|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.8%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=integrationTesting/1369/] > [console > log|https://builds.apache.org/job/Apache%20Jackrabbit%20Oak%20matrix/Ubuntu%20Slaves=ubuntu,jdk=JDK%201.8%20(latest),nsfixtures=SEGMENT_MK,profile=integrationTesting/1369/console] -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)
[jira] [Assigned] (OAK-6877) NodeBuilder#isReplaced behaves incorrectly for SegmentNodeStore
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6877?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Michael Dürig reassigned OAK-6877:
--
Assignee: Michael Dürig
> NodeBuilder#isReplaced behaves incorrectly for SegmentNodeStore
> ---
>
> Key: OAK-6877
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-6877
> Project: Jackrabbit Oak
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: segment-tar
>Reporter: Chetan Mehrotra
>Assignee: Michael Dürig
>Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 1.8
>
> Attachments: OAK-6877-v1.patch
>
>
> As seen in OAK-6876 NodeBuilder reports incorrectly for isReplaced call.
> Following test fails for Segment fixture
> {noformat}
> @Test
> public void isReplacedBehaviour() throws Exception{
> NodeBuilder nb = store.getRoot().builder();
> nb.child("a").setProperty("foo", "bar");
> store.merge(nb, EmptyHook.INSTANCE, CommitInfo.EMPTY);
> nb = store.getRoot().builder();
> nb.child("a").child("b");
> assertFalse(nb.getChildNode("a").isReplaced("foo"));
> }
> {noformat}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
