Author: paristote Date: 2011-05-24 06:44:25 -0400 (Tue, 24 May 2011) New Revision: 4423 Added: jcr/branches/1.12.x/patch/1.12.9-GA/JCR-1577/ jcr/branches/1.12.x/patch/1.12.9-GA/JCR-1577/readme.txt Removed: jcr/branches/1.12.x/patch/1.12.8-GA/JCR-1577/ Modified: jcr/branches/1.12.x/exo.jcr.component.core/src/main/java/org/exoplatform/services/jcr/impl/core/query/DefaultChangesFilter.java Log: JCR-1577 Check in DefaultChangesFilter if we use the right ids in case of a IOException while updating the index of the parentSearchManager How is the problem fixed? Fixed by passing correct lists of added and removed nodes on Exception to queryHandler.logErrorChanges(List, List); Modified: jcr/branches/1.12.x/exo.jcr.component.core/src/main/java/org/exoplatform/services/jcr/impl/core/query/DefaultChangesFilter.java =================================================================== --- jcr/branches/1.12.x/exo.jcr.component.core/src/main/java/org/exoplatform/services/jcr/impl/core/query/DefaultChangesFilter.java 2011-05-24 10:24:41 UTC (rev 4422) +++ jcr/branches/1.12.x/exo.jcr.component.core/src/main/java/org/exoplatform/services/jcr/impl/core/query/DefaultChangesFilter.java 2011-05-24 10:44:25 UTC (rev 4423) @@ -117,7 +117,7 @@ log.error("Error indexing changes " + e, e); try { - parentHandler.logErrorChanges(removedNodes, addedNodes); + parentHandler.logErrorChanges(parentRemovedNodes, parentAddedNodes); } catch (IOException ioe) { Added: jcr/branches/1.12.x/patch/1.12.9-GA/JCR-1577/readme.txt =================================================================== --- jcr/branches/1.12.x/patch/1.12.9-GA/JCR-1577/readme.txt (rev 0) +++ jcr/branches/1.12.x/patch/1.12.9-GA/JCR-1577/readme.txt 2011-05-24 10:44:25 UTC (rev 4423) @@ -0,0 +1,106 @@ +Summary + + Status: Check in DefaultChangesFilter if we use the right ids in case of a IOException while updating the index of the parentSearchManager + CCP Issue: N/A, Product Jira Issue: JCR-1577. + Complexity: N/A + +The Proposal +Problem description + +What is the problem to fix? +In the method DefaultChangesFilter.doUpdateIndex(Set<String> removedNodes, Set<String> addedNodes, Set<String> parentRemovedNodes, +Set<String> parentAddedNodes), I see +try + { + parentSearchManager.updateIndex(parentRemovedNodes, parentAddedNodes); + } + catch (RepositoryException e) + { + log.error("Error indexing changes " + e, e); + } + catch (IOException e) + { + log.error("Error indexing changes " + e, e); + try + { + parentHandler.logErrorChanges(removedNodes, addedNodes); + } + catch (IOException ioe) + { + log.warn("Exception occure when errorLog writed. Error log is not complete. " + ioe, ioe); + } + } + +shouldn't it be: +try + { + parentSearchManager.updateIndex(parentRemovedNodes, parentAddedNodes); + } + catch (RepositoryException e) + { + log.error("Error indexing changes " + e, e); + } + catch (IOException e) + { + log.error("Error indexing changes " + e, e); + try + { + parentHandler.logErrorChanges(parentRemovedNodes, parentAddedNodes); + } + catch (IOException ioe) + { + log.warn("Exception occure when errorLog writed. Error log is not complete. " + ioe, ioe); + } + } +Fix description + +How is the problem fixed? + + Fixed by passing correct lists of added and removed nodes on Exception to queryHandler.logErrorChanges(List, List); + +Patch information: JCR-1577.patch + +Tests to perform + +Reproduction test + none; + +Tests performed at DevLevel + + Full set of eXo and TCK test with manual tests in cluster; + +Tests performed at QA/Support Level +* + +Documentation changes + +Documentation changes: + none; + +Configuration changes + +Configuration changes: + none; + +Will previous configuration continue to work? + yes; + +Risks and impacts + +Can this bug fix have any side effects on current client projects? + none; + +Is there a performance risk/cost? + no; + +Validation (PM/Support/QA) + +PM Comment +* PL review: patch validated + +Support Comment +* Support review: patch validated + +QA Feedbacks +* +