jackrabbit-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Dekany <ddek...@freemail.hu>
Subject Re: Getting "custom" objects from the repository?
Date Sat, 16 Apr 2005 21:24:21 GMT
Saturday, April 16, 2005, 10:39:30 PM, Julien Viet wrote:

> ok for 1/ but 2/, isnt the notification synchronous ? (even if the spec
> does not mandate it).

The specification says:

  This specification defines only asynchronous event delivery. It is
  possible for a repository to also implement synchronous events in
  order to support the vetoing of changes before they happen. However,
  this functionality is outside the scope of this specification.

As it is "outside the scope of the specification", you don't even have
that, so the object mapper can't check if it can work correctly over the
JCR implementation in use or not.

Then, from the API docs of javax.jcr.observation.EventListener:

  An EventListener can be registered via the ObservationManager object.
  Event listeners are notified asynchronously, and see events after they
  occur and the transaction is committed. An event listener only sees
  events for which the session that registered it has sufficient access

which is absolutely not encouraging. Especially note that last sentence.
Because, it doesn't mater who has modified the node, if it has modified,
the cache system must realize that it is out of sync, so it never serves
outdated objects (that would ruing the "ACID").
Then, I'm not 100% sure about this one, but I think event listeners are
running inside the repository server, and not inside the repository
client. And since the cache is (typically) in the client's JVM, the
event listeners had connect back to the client's JVM somehow to send the
notifications... lot of complication and point of failure. And if the
event notification is synchronous, then it possibly causes serious
performance degradation, since then the commitment of the transaction is
done only if the event listener has completed the notification of the
cache system.

Best regards,
 Daniel Dekany

View raw message