jackrabbit-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Justin Edelson <justinedel...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [jr3] Flat hierarchy
Date Thu, 18 Feb 2010 21:36:29 GMT
On 2/18/10 4:27 PM, Alexander Klimetschek wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 22:04, Jeff Yemin <jeff.yemin@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Thomas Müller-2 wrote:
>>> You are right. Unfortunately "orderable child nodes" is the default.
>>
>> Where in the spec does it say what the default is for orderable child nodes?
>> The only place I see it is in the CND for nt:unstructured.  Or is this a
>> Jackrabbit implementation default that users now rely on?
> 
> I think Thomas refers to the commonly used nt:unstructured that has
> orderable child nodes. Even if you inherit from it, you can't change
> that behavior.

Perhaps JR3 should define a node type called unstructured-unordered :)
Would be non-standard, of course.

Justin

> 
> 
>> Of the use cases I'm aware of for flat
>> hierarchies, none require an ordering of the children anyway, so this might
>> be an acceptable limitation in the implementation.
> 
> Right, there are either a low number of nodes that might be orderable
> or a large number of nodes, that are unordered. At least these are the
> cases that jr3 should be optimized for.
> 
> So for the unordered case, one should use a node type that does not
> have orderable child nodes. If someone choses to add a lot of nodes to
> an orderable child nodes list, it is ok to be slow.
> 
> Regards,
> Alex
> 


Mime
View raw message