Re: ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException in ContentField.activate(...)

Hi Benjamin,

Indeed those duplicates are sure to cause problems. I would recommend 
shutting down Jahia, purging the duplicates and relaunching, to see if 
it solves the problem.

Regards,
  Serge Huber.

[email protected] wrote:

>
> Hi Serge!
>
> Finally I could reproduce the exception I was mentioning a month ago. 
> It somehow happens that for some fields there are two same entries in 
> the database. Here is an excerpt of our JAHIA_FIELDS_DATA table.
> *ID_JAHIA_FIELDS_DATA* 	*JAHIAID_JAHIA_FIELDS_DATA* 
> *PAGEID_JAHIA_FIELDS_DATA* 	*CTNID_JAHIA_FIELDS_DATA* 
> *FIELDDEFID_JAHIA_FIELDS_DATA* 	*TYPE_JAHIA_FIELDS_DATA* 
> *CONNECTTYPE_JAHIA_FIELDS_DATA* 	*VALUE_JAHIA_FIELDS_DATA* 
> *RANK_JAHIA_FIELDS_DATA* 	*RIGHTS_JAHIA_FIELDS_DATA* 	*VERSION_ID* 
> *WORKFLOW_STATE* 	*LANGUAGE_CODE*
> 10263 	1 	1 	10043 	10041 	1 	0 	100 	0 	11685 	0 	2 	shared
> 10263 	1 	1 	10043 	10041 	1 	0 	100 	0 	11685 	0 	2 	shared
> 10264 	1 	1 	10043 	10042 	20 	0 	
> 	0 	11686 	0 	2 	shared
> 10264 	1 	1 	10043 	10042 	20 	0 	
> 	0 	11686 	0 	2 	shared
> 10265 	1 	1 	10043 	10043 	20 	0 	
> 	0 	11687 	0 	2 	shared
> 10265 	1 	1 	10043 	10043 	20 	0 	
> 	0 	11687 	0 	2 	shared
> 10266 	1 	1 	10043 	10039 	2 	0 	test 	0 	11688 	0 	2 	de
> 10267 	1 	1 	10043 	10040 	20 	0 	
> 	0 	11689 	0 	2 	shared
>
>
>
> For those fields, which have two entries, we get the mentioned 
> exceptions. How come, that there are two same entries? I guess it is 
> not a normal behaviour and how can we prevent this exception, which 
> blocks the workflow as a page cannot be activated anymore?
>
> Greetings,
> Benjamin
>
> Serge wrote on Fri, 13 May 2005 02:17:07 -0700
>
> Hi Benjamin,
>
> Do you have a reliable way of reproducing this so that we may test it 
> ? We haven't be able to reproduce it here during our testing. Also 
> which JVM are you using ?
>
> Regards,
> Serge Huber.
>
> Benjamin wrote on Wed, 11 May 2005 03:09:32 -0700 :
>
> We are still using Jahia 4.0.5, but on heavy testing we encounter that 
> the workflow process is quite unstable sometimes. When looking in the 
> LOG files, I for instance can see an ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException in 
> the ContentField.acivate(...) method.
>
> In this loop we get this exception in the line 
> activeAndStagingEntryStates.remove (i);, because i has the value -1. 
> It seem strange anyway that the removing from the 
> activeAndStagingEntryStates collection is happening in the inner loop 
> and not in the outer loop. As you haven't changed the code in the 4.1 
> version it seems to work for everybody else, or could it be that there 
> is a bug?
>
> // we backup all active entries that will be replaced
> for (int i = 0; i < activeAndStagingEntryStates.size (); i++) {
> ContentObjectEntryState actEntryState = (ContentObjectEntryState) 
> activeAndStagingEntryStates.get (
> i);
> if (actEntryState.isActive ()) {
> for (int j = 0; j < stagedEntries.size (); j++) {
> ContentObjectEntryState staEntryState = (ContentObjectEntryState) 
> stagedEntries.get (
> j);
> if (actEntryState.getLanguageCode ().equals (
> staEntryState.getLanguageCode ())) {
> // ok appollo, we catched an active entry here! we handle this..
> if (versioningEnabled) {
>
> ContentObjectEntryState backupEntryState = ContentFieldDB.getInstance 
> ().backupDBValue (
> this, actEntryState); // we backup the active version
> // ok we backuped an entry of the field
> if (backupEntryState != null) {
> // if the entry state list is loaded, let's update it
> if (versioningEntryStates != null) {
> versioningEntryStates.add (backupEntryState);
> }
> // also we must call the changeEntryState because, like, we changed 
> the version or
> // something hehe..
> this.changeEntryState (actEntryState, backupEntryState,
> jParams, stateModifContext);
> }
> } else {
> // if versioning is not enabled, we delete the old value content!
> this.deleteEntry (actEntryState);
> }
> // we then delete the active entry
> ContentFieldDB.getInstance ().deleteDBValue (this, actEntryState);
> activeAndStagingEntryStates.remove (i);
> i -= 1;
> }
> }
> }
> }
>
> Greetings,
> Benjamin Papez