Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-jackrabbit-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 75158 invoked from network); 18 Jul 2005 14:08:48 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 18 Jul 2005 14:08:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 65269 invoked by uid 500); 18 Jul 2005 14:08:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact jackrabbit-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: jackrabbit-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list jackrabbit-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 65237 invoked by uid 99); 18 Jul 2005 14:08:29 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [192.87.106.226] (HELO ajax.apache.org) (192.87.106.226) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 18 Jul 2005 07:08:16 -0700 Received: from ajax.apache.org (ajax.apache.org [127.0.0.1]) by ajax.apache.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77CDFDA for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2005 16:08:13 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <20727264.1121695693489.JavaMail.jira@ajax.apache.org> Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 16:08:13 +0200 (CEST) From: "Walter Raboch (JIRA)" To: jackrabbit-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: [jira] Commented: (JCR-169) Make Jackrabbit clusterable In-Reply-To: <407268243.1121415191082.JavaMail.jira@ajax.apache.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N [ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-169?page=comments#action_12316038 ] Walter Raboch commented on JCR-169: ----------------------------------- NodeTypeRegistry: As mentioned in my comment (15/Jul) I prefer some sort of config management ("Config - the cluster should have a central place for config management "). NodeType definitions are config data in my understanding. Access mgr: We plan to implement some access manager for our project based on ACL objects saved as nodes in the repository. Because the persistence and observation manager are cluster aware, changes to the ACLs are distributed to all nodes. The access manager does not have to care. Or do I miss some point? > Make Jackrabbit clusterable > --------------------------- > > Key: JCR-169 > URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-169 > Project: Jackrabbit > Type: New Feature > Components: core > Reporter: Marcel Reutegger > Priority: Minor > > This jira issue discusses the technical implications on the current design of Jackrabbit to introduce clustering. > Particularly the following areas require thorough investigation: > - SharedItemStateManager and its cache > - cache integrity > - cache design: look aside, write through? > - hook for distributed cache, interface? > - isolation level > - transaction integrity within Jackrabbit, interaction with transient layer > - VirtualItemStateProvider > - same strategy as SharedItemStateManager? > - Search index > - single or per cluster node index? > - Observation > Please state more areas if needed. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa - For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira