jackrabbit-oak-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Evgeny Tugarev (Jira)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Updated] (OAK-9587) Add an attribute to enforce a strict index tag check
Date Wed, 29 Sep 2021 06:14:00 GMT

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-9587?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]

Evgeny Tugarev updated OAK-9587:
--------------------------------
    Component/s:     (was: query)
                 oak-search

> Add an attribute to enforce a strict index tag check
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: OAK-9587
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-9587
>             Project: Jackrabbit Oak
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>          Components: oak-search
>    Affects Versions: 1.22.8
>            Reporter: Evgeny Tugarev
>            Priority: Major
>
> JCR Query which does not specify an INDEX() tag may eventually pick up the tagged index.
> This is not an error, however this behaviour is not always desirable when a tagged index
must only be used by a specific query which explicitly specify an index tag and be transparent
to other queries which does not specify it.
> If I understand correctly the check is done [here|https://github.com/apache/jackrabbit-oak/blob/db55659c08dff47e9c28eef03f1a5628af13d8b2/oak-search/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/plugins/index/search/spi/query/FulltextIndexPlanner.java#L412]
> I propose to add a boolean parameter (strictTagCheck or sth similar) which enforces a
strict check for the index tag - the idea is to mark such index as wrong in case query does
not specify the index tag and an index definition contains a tag. I think this change is also
a backward compatible as does not change the existing behaviour, but adds a new one.
> N.B. Currently a workaround applied to set the high costPerExecution and costPerEntry
has a negative side effect of the query falling back to traverse and fails as it traverses
> 100 000 nodes.
> And, yes, it's an urgent issue :) 



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)

Mime
View raw message