On 2/8/07, Stefan Guggisberg <stefan.guggisberg@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2/7/07, Jukka Zitting <jukka.zitting@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 2/7/07, stefan@apache.org <stefan@apache.org> wrote:
> > >      public Node getNodeByUUID(UUID uuid) throws ItemNotFoundException, RepositoryException {
> > >          NodeImpl node = getNodeById(new NodeId(uuid));
> > > +        // since the uuid of a node is only exposed through jcr:uuid declared
> > > +        // by mix:referenceable it's rather unlikely that a client can possibly
> > > +        // know the internal uuid of a non-referenceable node; omitting the
> > > +        // check for mix:referenceable seems therefore to be a reasonable
> > > +        // compromise in order to improve performance.
> > > +/*
> > >          if (node.isNodeType(QName.MIX_REFERENCEABLE)) {
> > >              return node;
> > >          } else {
> > >              // there is a node with that uuid but the node does not expose it
> > >              throw new ItemNotFoundException(uuid.toString());
> > >          }
> > > +*/
> > > +        return node;
> > >      }
> >
> > Sounds reasonable, but I'm not convinced that the performance gain is
> > noticeable enough to justify the change. What's the access pattern
> > we're trying to speed up?
>
> well, applications that make *heavy* use of  Node.getNodeByUUID do

of course i meant Session.getNodeByUUID...

cheers
stefan

> benefit considerably as shown by our profiling data.
>
> cheers
> stefan
>
> >
> > BR,
> >
> > Jukka Zitting
> >
>