jackrabbit-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marcel Reutegger <marcel.reuteg...@gmx.net>
Subject Re: Next Generation Persistence
Date Fri, 13 Apr 2007 09:22:04 GMT
Jukka Zitting wrote:
> The copies I'm concerned about are created when a client wants to read
> a property that has not yet been persisted. For example if I want to
> do a large XML import and postprocess it before persisting all the
> changes. The "draft revision" model would nicely support such a use
> case without excessive memory requirements or having to make another
> copy of the subtree when saving it.
>> counter question: would it be possible to create a draft revision that is
>> immediately persisted?
> Certainly,  but see the concerns above. Doing that loses some of the
> nice session management features outlined in the proposal.
>> I'd rather not create objects in the core or the server that are long 
>> lived and
>> potentially not used because a client decides to discard a draft 
>> revision.
> A draft revision that gets discarded would just get removed from the
> disk, so I don't think this is a problem.

hmm, I see. there seems to be a fundamental mismatch between the spi and the ngp 
design. The spi clearly decouples the transient changes from the server whereas 
the ngp rather integrates them more tightly into the core.


View raw message