Mailing-List: contact users-help@jackrabbit.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <496E3979.5000908@rwmotloc.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:14:01 -0600
From: Alexander Wallace <aw@rwmotloc.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (Macintosh/20081209)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
Subject: Re: Cluster Datastore garbage collection.
References: <496CF2B2.8010006@rwmotloc.com>
 <c3ac3bad0901140627v3e1d30d3wc17cbd72e4eaa03a@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <c3ac3bad0901140627v3e1d30d3wc17cbd72e4eaa03a@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Alexander Klimetschek wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 8:59 PM, Alexander Wallace <aw@rwmotloc.com> wrote:
>   
>
> I would think so, but I am not 100% sure what happens if one node
> already has removed the reference to the datastore entry (aka marked
> unused during gc), but another cluster node still wants to read from
> it, because the removed node or property event hasn't arrived yet...
>
>   
Got it... Since the cluster syncronization happens very often, and 
sounds like running GC is not a super high priority, It seems that it 
would be safer to run the GC say, once a day during a very low traffic 
window, perhaps at 3 am or so, to minimize user exposure...
> Regards,
> Alex
>
>   
Thanks a lot for the response!

Alex.