commons-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Philippe Poulard <Philippe.Poul...@sophia.inria.fr>
Subject Re: [VFS] VFS.getManager().getFilesCache() - exists() vs findFiles()
Date Mon, 06 Jun 2005 14:04:47 GMT
Mario Ivankovits wrote:
> Philippe Poulard wrote:
> 
>> xmldbRaweb2004:xyl://user:pwd@www.foo.com/path/to/file.xml
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>    this is not the xmldb scheme, as recommended by XML:DB
> 
> I didnt mean to rename the provider, but to provide a mechanism where 
> one can tie a set of FileSystemOptions to a specific provider.
> However, there is also another way to solve this. You can pass the 
> FileSystemOptions to the resolveFile method.
> 
> FileObject fo = FileSystemManager.resolveFile(String name, 
> FileSystemOptions fileSystemOptions)
> Any subsequent call to "fo" (e.g. FileObject.resolveFile) will be able 
> to access these options.
> 
>>> What if we create a new method "FileObject.createFile(Map attributes)"?
>>> That way there is no need to change the contract of the IMAGINARY 
>>> file type and it makes clear that if you would like to create a new 
>>> file with special attributes you have to call that method.
>>
>> in this case, because of the particularity of all this stuff, it will 
>> be more suitable to override the getAttributes() method (or another, i 
>> will look the code) to perform the operation without checking the file 
>> type
> 
> The best is to find a clean solution. The http filesystem might also 
> profit from it as it might be needet to send the content-type of a file 
> to the sever.
> 
> The problem with the solution to allow IMAGINARY Files to have 
> attributes is the setAttribute Method. Its passed down to
> AbstractFileObject.doSetAttribute(final String atttrName, final Object 
> value)
> which might immediately access the filesystem. But with IMAGNIARY files 
> there is no file where the filesystem can attach those attribute then.
> 
> So why is it that bad to have a "FileObject.createFile/Folder(Map 
> attributes)" isnt it a clean entry point to create a File/Folder with 
> specific attributes?
> Afterwards one can use setAttribute/getAttribute to modify them (if 
> possible)

ok, that's clean

thanks

> 
> Also its needet to separate the attributes into FileSystemAttributes and 
> FileAttributes.
> You might not see any difference when you use your active tags. But 
> there are differences if you use VFS in your code.
> 
> *) You have to pass the FileSystemAttributes only to the first resolveFile.
> *) With every different set of FileSystemAttributes VFS will create a 
> new FileSystem. So if you access two clusters VFS internally maintains 
> two filesytems.
> 
> xmldb:xyl://user:pwd@www.foo.com/path/to/file.xml with cluster=Raweb2004 
> is different to
> xmldb:xyl://user:pwd@www.foo.com/path/to/file.xml with cluster=Raweb1998
> 

this solution doesn't suit to Xyleme, because the idea of cluster is 
somewhat unusual : you need it when you store a file, but you may omit 
it when you retrieve it !

-- 
Cordialement,

            ///
           (. .)
  -----ooO--(_)--Ooo-----
|   Philippe Poulard    |
  -----------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-user-help@jakarta.apache.org


Mime
View raw message