Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-jackrabbit-oak-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-jackrabbit-oak-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 432B6F9B3 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 2013 07:39:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 75224 invoked by uid 500); 26 Mar 2013 07:39:29 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-jackrabbit-oak-dev-archive@jackrabbit.apache.org Received: (qmail 74812 invoked by uid 500); 26 Mar 2013 07:39:18 -0000 Mailing-List: contact oak-dev-help@jackrabbit.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: oak-dev@jackrabbit.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list oak-dev@jackrabbit.apache.org Received: (qmail 74727 invoked by uid 99); 26 Mar 2013 07:39:16 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 26 Mar 2013 07:39:16 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of jukka.zitting@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.175 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.214.175] (HELO mail-ob0-f175.google.com) (209.85.214.175) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 26 Mar 2013 07:39:10 +0000 Received: by mail-ob0-f175.google.com with SMTP id va7so3739440obc.34 for ; Tue, 26 Mar 2013 00:38:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:content-type; bh=llmXHD6xKWSfXGQuSzN9M6f28wuabNz/vN0kLmQhXzY=; b=hQNiPz3NoN9P7BeYyMHHsPlwiIpDCxDH9yRzw5ptAikVaaLn3aJLThCXAWeaKcG5MX 6BrhKGkVi98lda9dX0EOWpiF88mc8hfBK0LJdthqcwaosxsGLV8yEEtE0518zf89tQiI JkYIFGYi9z5SX5dlxpzkL1my20h7jfEHGnIhQO0Vz0nQKY8O0bohqUdMhHo22nhiGcSm 0f8nqeRlcW4D3LOmDZ3KeBrPygv3Rk37brPtQy7C/aNsUCnfoBaUuK7SVzZRPDhsCcKl qOT/5GfY7zqSlKUPmbWaKZ7EdaGkr3UJNO9kIy7xfhii/MA+DcqkN6dHvqz+WWvCq6rq l+og== X-Received: by 10.60.99.68 with SMTP id eo4mr208377oeb.126.1364283528749; Tue, 26 Mar 2013 00:38:48 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.132.20 with HTTP; Tue, 26 Mar 2013 00:38:28 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <514C93F0.4040107@adobe.com> References: <9C0FC4C8E9C29945B01766FC7F9D3898178B1A68D8@eurmbx01.eur.adobe.com> <51487168.6050906@adobe.com> <9C0FC4C8E9C29945B01766FC7F9D3898178BA0F7B3@eurmbx01.eur.adobe.com> <514C4510.7000508@apache.org> <514C725D.5080603@adobe.com> <514C93F0.4040107@adobe.com> From: Jukka Zitting Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2013 09:38:28 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: svn commit: r1458234 - in /jackrabbit/oak/trunk: oak-core/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/core/ oak-core/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/kernel/ oak-core/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/plugins/version/ oak-core/src/main/java/o To: Oak devs Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Hi, On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 7:25 PM, Angela Schreiber wrote: > however, please keep in mind that if we are really going to move > the permission evaluation below the tree level, we > a) need to have an efficient way to determine the path of a > given node state (or it's immutabletree representation) > as our permission evaluation basically is path-based Agreed. My main point above was just to note that the cost of caching parent node states around is lower than that of caching paths. We can definitely keep the path around in places where it is needed, but as mentioned earlier I'd really like to avoid having to calculate it for *all* node states. For example, assuming we implement the optimization of detecting that the current user has full access to an entire subtree, then there should be no need to keep track of paths within that subtree as we can just skip all further access checks in that subtree. BR, Jukka Zitting