[jira] [Commented] (OAK-2644) Lift the 150 character limit on item names

["Thomas Mueller (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-2644?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14366800#comment-14366800 ] 

Thomas Mueller commented on OAK-2644:
-------------------------------------

The problem is node names. The limit on property names is much higher (for MongoDB, the maximum BSON document size is 16 megabytes).
 
According to http://docs.mongodb.org/manual/reference/limits , the limit for a shard key is 512 bytes. If sharding is not used, the limit is 1024 bytes.

> Lift the 150 character limit on item names
> ------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: OAK-2644
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OAK-2644
>             Project: Jackrabbit Oak
>          Issue Type: Wish
>          Components: mongomk, rdbmk
>    Affects Versions: 1.0.12, 1.1.7
>            Reporter: Felix Meschberger
>
> Currently -- as of Oak 1.1.7 and 1.0.12 releases --  there is a limit on the length of 150 characters for item names in Oak.
> This limit seems to be based upon a limitation in the MongoDB MK implementation because MongoDB has a limit of 1024 bytes (I think) for indexable properties.
> I think this limitation is highly unexpected and seems to be largeyl undocumented. For previous users of Jackrabbit it should probably at least be documented on the [Backwards Compatibility|http://jackrabbit.apache.org/oak/docs/differences.html] page.
> The main problem, though, I have with this limit is, that it is based on a limitation of a particular MK implementation and hits through the full stack. I would have rather expected such a persistence limitation to be fully hidden and handled inside the MK implementation.
> Granted this limitation does not seem to violate the JCR 2.1 specification which clearly states in section 3.2.4 Naming Restrictions:
> bq. This definition of JCR name represents the least restrictive set of constraints permitted for the naming of items and other entities. A repository may further restrict the names of entities to a subset of JCR names and in most cases is encouraged to do so.
> and
> bq. A writable repository may enforce any implementation-specific constraint by causing an exception to be thrown on an invalid JCR write method call. 
> Still I think it is a questionable limitation for a generic repository where such names may be auto-generated and thus be quite long depending on the use case.
> I understand this may be hard to fix but would still be happy to be able to have (virtually) unlimited name length again as it was the case in Jackrabbit 2.
> Thanks.
> See also OAK-333 for a previous discussion.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)