jackrabbit-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefan Guggisberg <stefan.guggisb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [Jackrabbit Wiki] Update of "PersistenceManagerFAQ" by edgarpoce
Date Thu, 09 Jun 2005 13:23:49 GMT
On 6/9/05, Serge Huber <shuber2@jahia.com> wrote:
> Stefan Guggisberg wrote:
> 
> >me too sorry to be so pedantic ;) the role of the PM in jackrabbit
> >(at least as  i originally designed it) is comparable to the role of
> >that layer in a rdbms that reads and writes raw table/record data to/from the
> >disk (e.g. tablespace files in oracle). you wouldn't expect oracle to store
> >the raw table/record data in ORM instead of its tablespace files i guess.
> >btw, edgar's PM FAQ quite nicely explains the role of the PM in jackrabbit.
> >
> >
> The problem as I see it is that RDBMS handle also all the transaction,
> clustering, caching, replication, backup etc. This makes for a lot of
> complexity. If we do the same in Jackrabbit this means that we will be
> reproducing a lot of what lower storage systems (like JDBC) can already
> do no ?

i am not saying that jackrabbit should provide implementations of 
such services on the persistence layer. a lot of powerfull yet simple
storage systems can provide this kind of functionality without introducing 
a lot of overhead. take for example berkeley db or mysql. on the other
hand i don't believe that using an object relational db would gain any benefits
but only introduce a lot of unnecessary complexity. you can easily
(and efficiently;)
persist jackrabbit's data (NodeState, PropertyState & NodeReferences objects) 
in a primitive schema with three 2-column tables and still benefit from 
transactions, etc. provided by your storage system.

cheers
stefan



> 
> Just trying to understand :)
> 
> cheers,
>   Serge...
>

Mime
View raw message