Mailing-List: contact oak-dev-help@jackrabbit.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: oak-dev@jackrabbit.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of jukka.zitting@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.214.174 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAOFYJNbTzpWWJHY4pukGg-9mf_exOXxvcy9NXSa7NPxy_Y5pag@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAOFYJNbTzpWWJHY4pukGg-9mf_exOXxvcy9NXSa7NPxy_Y5pag@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jukka Zitting <jukka.zitting@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 16:45:13 +0200
Message-ID: 
 <CAOFYJNaHA3ia4QpqavrQAoHENPnrNRZWvkV1spBn=pwYKb63cg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Dropping ItemImpl.checkPropertected()
To: Oak devs <oak-dev@jackrabbit.apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Hi,

On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Jukka Zitting <jukka.zitting@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thoughts on this? Unless anyone has strong objections, I'd suggest we
> simply drop the checkProtected() calls and have the relevant
> constraints enforced during save().

I filed https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-652 to track the
implementation of whichever consensus we find on this, to remore or to
optimize the checkProtected() call.

Meanwhile I'll add a temporary feature flag to allow further
benchmarking without having this issue mask other potential problems.

BR,

Jukka Zitting