jackrabbit-oak-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Thomas Mueller <muel...@adobe.com>
Subject Re: Conflict handling in Oak
Date Tue, 18 Dec 2012 14:30:30 GMT
Hi,

I would probably initially only implement "strict conflict detection" in
the MongoMK, if it's not already implemented in that way(?).

I don't see a need currently that both MicroKernel implementations behave
in the exact same way, until we have a clear picture what the best
solution is.

Regards,
Thomas






On 12/18/12 3:25 PM, "Thomas Mueller" <mueller@adobe.com> wrote:

>Hi,
>
>>1) Make the definition of conflicts sufficiently strong to exclude such
>>cases. That's Tom's proposal from this Thread.
>
>Ah, OK, I thought you meant it could still be a problem even with my
>proposal.
>
>I guess failing on (node-level-) conflicts would be the most simple
>solution, as a start. It would also simplify checking node type
>constraints within oak-core I guess (if we actually want to have strict
>checks).
>
>At the beginning, I would probably not try to merge conflicts in oak-core,
>and simply fail the commit. If it turns out to be a problem in reality, we
>could still change it. Unless, of course, we already know it's a problem?
>
>>2) Allow inconsistent journals.
>
>I guess we don't want that. But the question is how close the journal has
>to match the original commit, specially "move" and "copy" operations. If
>they need to be preserved (do they?), then it's complicated.
>
>Regards,
>Thomas
>


Mime
View raw message