jackrabbit-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ian Boston <...@tfd.co.uk>
Subject Re: [jira] Commented: (JCR-169) Make Jackrabbit clusterable
Date Fri, 01 Sep 2006 09:29:07 GMT
Marcel Reutegger wrote:
> Ian Boston wrote:
>> So, if you have 50x200MB of Lucene index... for example.... and wanted 
>> that to be accessible in a cluster environment, would Jackrabbit be a 
>> good place to put those segments ?
> just to clarify, would this lucene index be 'application data', which is 
> stored like regular content through the JCR api? Or do you mean the 
> jackrabbit internal lucene segments?

This is application data from JCR's point of view.

>> The big killer for Lucene is the ability to seek efficiently on the 
>> central blob (I think), but presumably by choosing the right Binary 
>> storage strategy that comes partially for free ?
> Jackrabbit always copies a binary to a temp file or into memory when the 
> property value is accessed. That is, the seek would always be local. But 
> as I already mentioned in another thread, JCR does not support random 
> access on binary properties. A binary property returns a plain InputStream.


>> If this is the case, I could replace my, slightly odd, segment 
>> distribution mechanism with Jackrabbit.
> yes, you certainly get a couple of goodies you otherwise don't have. 
> e.g. observation on the index files ;)
>> Last question,
>> Is JCR-169 being actively worked on ?
> It doesn't have a high priority, but we are working on it on a 
> conceptual level. discussions during coffee breaks, etc. Basically how 
> the problems stated in JCR-169 can be solved and what needs to be 
> changed in the core to implement the feature blocks in a clustered 
> environment.
>> Is there an area where another pair of hands would help... I would 
>> like to be able to deploy Jackrabbit in a cluster.
> One major area is how changes from one cluster node are distributed to 
> other cluster nodes. Giota implemented something like a prototype, but 
> I'm not sure what the current state is. See also this discussion: 
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.jackrabbit.devel/6935

Thank you for the pointer. I'll read it. There has been some use of 
JGroups for cluster wide distribution of events.... but it might not 
make sense here.

> Or any other area mentioned in JCR-169, you can simply pick one ;)

Ok, when I get pressure to make it work in a cluster, I'll jump in.

> regards
>  marcel

View raw message