Hi Stefan, Thanks for your quick reply...
On 27 Aug 2010, at 11:36, Stefan Guggisberg wrote: > hi robin, > > On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 11:25 AM, Robin Wyles <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I'm having problems migrating an existing repository from Jackrabbit 1.6.0 >> to 2.1.0. >> >> Here are the steps I followed to test the migration: >> >> 1. Update app to use Jackrabbit 2.1.0, run unit tests etc. Manually test >> against empty 2.1.0 repository. All works fine here. Our repository >> configuration has not changed at all between versions. >> >> 2. Used mysqldump to export production repository. >> >> 3. Copy production repository directory (workspace folder, datastore, index >> folders etc.) to test machine. >> >> 4. Import SQL file from 2 above to new DB on test machine. >> >> 5. Start application on test machine. >> >> The result of the above is that the application starts up without error but >> that the repository appears empty. I am able to add new nodes to the >> repository, which behave correctly within the application yet none of the >> existing nodes are visible. I've tried xpath queries against known paths, >> e.g. "//library/*" and these return 0 nodes. >> >> A few things I've tried/noticed: >> >> 1. Repeating steps 3 and 4 above, then removing the old index directories >> before starting the application. Jackrabbit creates new lucene indexes, but >> they are very small, just like they would be when initialising an empty >> repository. Also, the index files are called indexes_2 rather than indexes >> as they were under 1.6.0. >> >> 2. When starting the app after the migration I notice that 4 extra records >> have been added to the BUNDLE table, 3 extra records are added to the >> VERSION_BUNDLE table and 2 extra records added to the VERSION_NAMES table. >> Again, this seems to be consistent with what is added automatically added to >> the database when a new repository is initialised. >> >> So, basically it appears that Jackrabbit is completely ignoring the existing >> repository data, and instead initialising a new repos using the existing >> database… >> >> If anyone has any ideas as to how I can get 2.1.0 to recognise our existing >> repository they'd be gratefully received - I feel there must be something >> simple I've overlooked! > > hmm, seems like the key values (i.e. the id format) has changed. > however, i am not aware of such a change. > maybe someone else knows more? The release notes for Jackrabbit 2.0.0 claim that it is backward compatible with 1.x repositories. I've seen a couple of messages on the users list relating to migration issues but these seem to involve custom nodetypes, whereas our repository has no custom nodetypes. How may I see what key values/ID format is used by the different versions? This sounds like quite a major change to me, and I'm sure something that would've been documented! Thanks, Robin
