jackrabbit-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jukka Zitting <jukka.zitt...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [jr3] Unified persistence
Date Wed, 17 Feb 2010 16:29:07 GMT

On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 5:00 PM, Alexander Klimetschek <aklimets@day.com> wrote:
> I think a good idea (and I guess this is what you have in mind) would
> be to have a lower-level persistence API that is journal/cluster-aware
> and allows for all the basic node and property storage.

Agreed. The big question related to this is whether we should try to
implement this layer ourselves or if we should rather look at existing
solutions like clustered/distributed databases (either relational or
NoSQL). The former would probably give us the best theoretical
performance as we could design the low-level storage model around the
content hierarchy, while the latter would save us years worth of work.

Personally I think we should go with an existing solution and
implement the JCR content hierarchy on top of that, just like we
currently do with the JDBC-based persistence managers. Instead of
relational databases, I'm especially interested in solutions like
distributed hash tables (Project Voldemort, etc.) or databases
(Cassandra, etc.) that are based on the idea of eventual consistency
and offer an easy way to scale horizontally in a cloud environment.


Jukka Zitting

View raw message