> How does it perform compared to TarMK
> a) when the entire repo doesn't fit into RAM allocated to the container ?
> b) when the working set doesn't fit into RAM allocated to the container ?
I think this is some of the things we need to find out along the way.
Currently my thinking is to move
On 5 March 2018 at 16:04, Michael Dürig wrote:
> > How does it perform compared to TarMK
> > a) when the entire repo doesn't fit into RAM allocated to the container ?
> > b) when the working set doesn't fit into RAM allocated to the container ?
>
> I think this is some of the
A candidate for the Jackrabbit Oak 1.6.10 release is available at:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/jackrabbit/oak/1.6.10/
The release candidate is a zip archive of the sources in:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jackrabbit/oak/tags/jackrabbit-oak-1.6.10/
The SHA1 checksum of
On 2018-03-05 16:49, Davide Giannella wrote:
...
[X] +1 Release this package as Apache Jackrabbit Oak 1.6.10
...where...
[INFO] Apache Maven 3.5.2 (138edd61fd100ec658bfa2d307c43b76940a5d7d;
2017-10-18T09:58:13+02:00)
[INFO] OS name: "windows 10", version: "10.0", arch: "amd64", family: