jackrabbit-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Serge Huber <shub...@jahia.com>
Subject Re: Considering Jackrabbit
Date Mon, 18 Jul 2005 11:36:26 GMT

Hi David, andy,

David Nuescheler wrote:

>to me it seems like we have a number of people on this list 
>asking for a jdbc persistence manager, but the one that we 
>have (the "orm pm") does not receive enough development 
>support by all those people that are interested in it?
>if that really is the case then i would suggest that some
>of the people that are using the orm pm are pitching in to 
>catch up with the rest of jackrabbit and make it 
>"production ready" ( whatever that means for an 
>unreleased project ;) )
Thanks David, I'm glad somebody else than me is saying that :) (for 
those not in-the-know, I've been working on the initial implementation 
of the ORM-PM.

>i think that having another jdbc approach without scraping 
>the orm pm will only spread the seemingly small *developer*
>base interested in supporting rdbms backed repositories even 
I wonder btw whatever happened to the iBatis implementation that was 
done a while ago ? Any news ?

Anyway, my take on DB-based persistence managers is that they need :
- a caching system for performance
- to be able to handle transactions
- to be able to handle commit/rollback
- use mapping files to be able to change the table and column names as 
they might conflict
- be as high-performance as possible (although we will always have the 
performance cost of network traffic)
- allow for clustering

In those criteria, an ORM-based implementation seams reasonable, 
especially the Hibernate one. It is perfectly possible to do all this 
without an ORM, but it would mean re-developping part of an ORM anyway.

And as always, in terms of speed : memory > filesystem > db :)

  Serge Huber.

View raw message