jackrabbit-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Zoltan Farkas <zolyfar...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: question about jackrabbit 2.1.1 versioning unextected behavior
Date Wed, 08 Sep 2010 10:40:16 GMT
OnParentVersion was not set at all. Do I need a specific setting?

I could use separate names, how can I define the node type to allow a unspecified number of
child nodes?

--zoly

On Sep 8, 2010, at 3:48 AM, Jukka Zitting <jukka.zitting@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 9:04 PM, Zoltan Farkas <zolyfarkas@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> The problem is that when restoring a node to a specific version, some
>> of the subnodes are not restored properly.
> 
> Just checking: the OnParentVersion attribute of the child nodes is set
> to COPY, right?
> 
>> Could this be a persistence specific issue?
> 
> Sounds unlikely. The logic of correctly handling same-name siblings in
> complex operations like version restore is pretty challenging, so I
> wouldn't be surprised if there's a bug lurking there somewhere. As a
> workaround, is it possible for you to use separate names for all the
> my:SubConfig nodes?
> 
> See JCR-43 [1] for an old, possibly related issue. It could no longer
> be reproduced in Jackrabbit 1.6, but you may want to look at extending
> the RestoreSameNameSiblingTest class to see if you can reproduce your
> problem.
> 
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-43
> 
> BR,
> 
> Jukka Zitting

Mime
View raw message