Mailing-List: contact dev-help@jackrabbit.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@jackrabbit.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of stefan.guggisberg@gmail.com
 designates 66.249.92.168 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=dtaNd0FHgMo91DzWLFcn8k86m43H17gkmYPRaVtge9PTXIVqewDitZWJkWWMlO7U7sacUg+HS9a+rANjvMjjtWRYBY3Rpr4ztzdGjzeG5xf1f90feTqVrgvMYS3OCUz6RjhSIIbSkIZoBOBs4mACsA81Ve/eupl8Z2eQJM5BJr4=
Message-ID: <90a8d1c00706210141r57f7850av31711655597e2f53@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 10:41:32 +0200
From: "Stefan Guggisberg" <stefan.guggisberg@gmail.com>
To: dev@jackrabbit.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Jackrabbit repository model
In-Reply-To: <EC213738EDD1C348BBE6012077FB746B0778C7@asterion.legisway.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <90a8d1c00706210114n3b741445o34efba47c23174c1@mail.gmail.com>
	 <EC213738EDD1C348BBE6012077FB746B0778C7@asterion.legisway.com>

On 6/21/07, Fr=E9d=E9ric Esnault <fesn@legisway.com> wrote:
>
>
> Fr=E9d=E9ric Esnault - Ing=E9nieur R&D
>
> > i tested write performance (adding a node to a parent with many child n=
odes)
> > since this suffers with very large child node sets. using samename sibl=
ings has
> > no impact on write performance.
>
> Writing one node, even with thousands of child nodes already on the paren=
t node is not bad for performances, first, and for us (my company and the p=
roject) the writing is not critical, but reading/searching IS critical. Tha=
t's why my testing is - mostly - about reading/searching.

ok, i see.

>
> > i guess jukka meant that we should first gather a "real life"
> > requirements/use cases list from user feedback rather than discussing
> > architectures accommodating theoretical use cases. I agree with jukka.
>
> I agree on this, a debate must be based on enough material. If ever I can=
 help.....
> But the architecture I'm using for tests is not coming from nowhere, it s=
ticks very closely to the projects needs, based on 4 previous version histo=
ry use cases. So it may have a value as a requirement proposal.

absolutely! your feedback is very appreciated. i guess i didn't
express myself clearly enough, sorry. with architecture i referred to
jackrabbit's core design, not your
repository model.

cheers
stefan

>
> Frederic Esnault
>