[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=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=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=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=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=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=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=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=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=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=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=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=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)
