jackrabbit-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marcel Reutegger <marcel.reuteg...@gmx.net>
Subject Re: Dependency on cqfs-jackrabbit
Date Wed, 18 May 2005 13:16:06 GMT
Since the cqfs-*.jars are available from a maven repository I don't 
think there is a bootstrap problem. sure, if you have to build both from 
the sources you will have to temprarily remove the cqfs dependency from 
jackrabbit. jackrabbit will still compile because cqfs is only a 
dependency that is needed when configured that way.

If I'm the only one using a windows machine I would be ok with removing 
the dependency, but I guess I'm not.


Felix Meschberger wrote:
> Hi all,
> The Jackrabbit project contains a dependency on "cqfs-jackrabbit" and 
> "cqfs" provided by Day Software. The former contains a single class 
> CQFileSystem implementing the "org.apache.jackrabbit.core.fs.FileSystem" 
> to provide an alternative for Jackrabbit's own LocalFileSystem 
> implementation. This dependency is part of the Jackrabbit project such 
> that this implementation is available to the test cases for them to run 
> faster on Windows-based development boxes.
> The problem with this project-level dependency is that the 
> cqfs-jackrabbit project contains a dependency on the Jackrabbit project 
> to get the interface to be implemented. Now there is a cyclic dependency 
> which is not good conceptually and which creates a bootstrap problem.
> I would like to break this cyclic dependency by removing the cqfs 
> dependency from Jackrabbit altogether. This would result in the tests 
> being configured to use LocalFileSystem instead of CQFileSystem. 
> Consequently performance - esp. on Windows boxes - would suffer. Simple 
> tests on Windows XP show, that a full build with test runs take around 
> 10-11 minutes with LocalFileSystem compared to around 5-6 minutes with 
> CQFileSystem. The same hardware running Fedora Core 3 runs the full 
> build cycle in 4-5 minutes regardless of whether LocalFileSystem or 
> CQFileSystem is used.
> Nothing would of course prevent developers from configuring tests on 
> their local platform with more performing FileSystem implementations.
> What do you think ?
> Regards
> Felix Meschberger

View raw message