Re: [discuss][scalability] oak:asyncConflictResolution

2016-03-22 Thread Stefan Egli
Hi, On 21/03/16 21:23, "Michael Dürig" wrote: > There is org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.PartialConflictHandler and > a couple of its implementations already. Maybe this could be leveraged > here by somehow connecting it to the mix-ins you propose. Yes, I think it

Re: [discuss][scalability] oak:asyncConflictResolution

2016-03-22 Thread Davide Giannella
On 21/03/2016 20:03, Stefan Egli wrote: > Hi oak-devs, > > tl.dr: suggestion is to introduce a new property (or mixin) that enables > async merge for a subtree in a cluster case while at the same time > pre-defines conflict resolution, since conflicts currently prevent > trouble-free async

Re: [discuss][scalability] oak:asyncConflictResolution

2016-03-21 Thread Michael Dürig
Hi, There is org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.spi.commit.PartialConflictHandler and a couple of its implementations already. Maybe this could be leveraged here by somehow connecting it to the mix-ins you propose. Michael On 21.3.16 9:03 , Stefan Egli wrote: Hi oak-devs, tl.dr: suggestion is to

Re: [discuss][scalability] oak:asyncConflictResolution

2016-03-21 Thread Stefan Egli
On 21/03/16 21:03, "Stefan Egli" wrote: >...a third one could again be 'strict' (which would correspond to JCR >semantics >as are the default today) .. actually that would not be possible asynchronously, scratch that.. Cheers, Stefan