Intent to backport OAK-6229

Hi, I would like to backport OAK-6229 to 1.4 and 1.6 branches. This fixes a bug where the 'datastorecheck' command throws an NPE when using the S3DataStore. Thanks Amit

Re: upgrade repository structure with backward-incompatible changes

On Wed, 2017-05-17 at 09:37 +, Michael Marth wrote: > Hi Marco, > > Maybe I don’t understand correctly your use case, but would it be > easier to simply write a script using the JCR API to do the changes > in the repo? > > Michael For bulk operations like that Sling Pipes is also an

Re: upgrade repository structure with backward-incompatible changes

Hi Marco, Maybe I don’t understand correctly your use case, but would it be easier to simply write a script using the JCR API to do the changes in the repo? Michael On 16/05/17 18:33, "Marco Piovesana" wrote: >Hi Tomek, >yes I'm trying to upgrade within the same

Re: Possible memory leak

Okay, after looking further into this it is indeed as you explained, thanks! > On 17 May 2017, at 09:42, Chetan Mehrotra wrote: > > On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 7:04 PM, Barry d'Hoine > wrote: >> org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.cache.CacheLIRS > >

Re: index selection when 0 or 1 property clause (or sort clause) matches

Hello, The main issue of delegating in entryCount, is that if the index contains more than 1000 docs and the query does not contain fulltext clauses the index planner will use the number *1000 *as the entryCount, ovewriting the actual size of the index [Math.min(definition.getEntryCount(),

Re: Possible memory leak

On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 7:04 PM, Barry d'Hoine wrote: > org.apache.jackrabbit.oak.cache.CacheLIRS The CacheLIRS instance is a cache and hence would be referring to a big chunk of heap. Probably thats why MAT flags it. This alone does not confirm its a memory leak. The

Re: index selection when 0 or 1 property clause (or sort clause) matches

> Using the entryCount was our first option, but we decided to modify > costPerEntry instead. Basically these are the reasons: What I meant was not the use of "entryCount" property but just that the sub index /nodeA/nodeB/includedC being a subset of /nodeA/nodeB/ it would have lower value for