jackrabbit-oak-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Dürig <mdue...@apache.org>
Subject Re: On setting component boundaries in Oak
Date Fri, 09 Mar 2012 14:07:18 GMT

On 9.3.12 14:55, Jukka Zitting wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Michael Dürig<mduerig@apache.org>  wrote:
>> Why do we need an SPI?
>
> I think the main difference is in whether we want to have all content
> accesses go through JCR or not (compare the overview diagram I sent
> earlier to the alternative one at [1]).
>
> Having everything go through JCR adds a bit of overhead (stuff like
> namespace mappings are normally not needed) and makes it hard or
> impossible to express certain kinds of features (like for example
> ETags, batch operations or alternative query models).
>
> I'd say that the main design difference between such an Oak API and
> the existing Jackrabbit SPI should be that there's no need to be able
> to layer the Oak API on top of an arbitrary JCR implementation. Thus
> we can better expose and leverage the specific features of an Oak
> repository.

Yes this makes total sense. My point was, if the oak-spi is nothing more 
than jcr modulo transient space, why would we need another API?

Michael

>
> [1] http://people.apache.org/~jukka/2012/oak-overview2.png
>
> BR,
>
> Jukka Zitting

Mime
View raw message