jackrabbit-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefan Guggisberg <stefan.guggisb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Jackrabbit fails to start if database user is not schema owner
Date Sun, 15 Mar 2009 14:48:07 GMT
On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 1:36 PM, Alexander Klimetschek <aklimets@day.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 10:35 AM, Stefan Guggisberg
> <stefan.guggisberg@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Jukka Zitting <jukka.zitting@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Thinking out loud: Wouldn't it be so simple if a database-based
>>> persistence manager used only a single table with the workspace name
>>> included as an extra column?
>>
>> agreed, however write performance might suffer in the case of many large
>> workspaces.
>
> It probably only "really" suffers when multiple workspaces are used at
> the same time, forcing the database to synchronize stuff that is
> actually separate.

AFAIK larger table indices are more expensive to maintain, i.e. write
operations become slower the larger the table grows.

> But a simpler solution for the problem that a user might have rights
> to read/write a table, but not rights to see the metadata about it (if
> this is actually possible in some databases), would be to add an
> option for disabling the checkSchema() check. This would not read the
> metadata to check for existence of the table and would not try to
> create a table. Instead it could simply log the necessary create table
> sql statement (eg. if an sql error happens, like "table does not
> exist").
>
> This option would be off by default and wouldn't force us to rewrite
> all the persistence managers and break backwards compatibility.
>
> Regards,
> Alex
>
> --
> Alexander Klimetschek
> alexander.klimetschek@day.com
>

Mime
View raw message