jackrabbit-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sean Dynan" <seandy...@bigfoot.com>
Subject Re: Newbie seeking a leg up
Date Mon, 04 Sep 2006 08:55:45 GMT
Thanks Michael.

Yeah I'm gearing up to run a bunch of metrics (it's the only way,
right? ;-) But I was also hoping to get some insight into some advice
I'd read from mailing list archives.

1. "Use separate Write and Read repositories for high volume
applications." This doesn't sound like what I would want since there
is an implied lazy synch and I want my users to be able to see saved
content immediately (not at some arbitrary time in the future).

2. "A deep-noded workspace may be more efficient/speedy for updates
than a shallow, wide workspace." Again, this makes me pause for
thought since I envisage my repository 'schema' being wide rather than
deep.

I guess I'm hunting for some Jackrabbit best practices, if such things exist.

Thanks.

-- 
Sean Dynan


On 9/4/06, Michael Neale <michael.neale@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Sean.
>
> I was also looking in to how Jackrabbit behaved for my needs (I had some
> specific numbers I was looking for) - the best thing I found was to just
> build up some basic test code to load up enough nodes to verify it would do
> roughly what I needed (which was a bit more effort then I thought, but I got
> there in the end).
>
> The moral of the tale: try it ! hack away and see how it behaves. For a
> large flat structure like you are suggesting, it seems that save operations
> can be a little slow (but slow is relative, in terms of user experience its
> still fast) for large numbers of nodes under the same parent, but otherwise
> seemed fine (I was also concerned with versioning a lot, which I am not sure
> concerns you).
>
> On 9/4/06, Sean Dynan <seandynan@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all
> >
> > I am just starting to investigate Jackrabbit as the content repository
> > for an application and some advice from the experts would seriously
> > speed up my evaluation.
> >
> > The problem domain in question is somewhat similar to a corporate mail
> > server:
> > - Large user base
> > - Frequent user reads and writes, mostly of text and
> >    images. By 'frequent' I mean usage on a par with an
> >    email client
> >
> > Where it differs from the mail server comparison:
> > - Users can query the repository by keyword and expect
> >    rapid results (think Google)
> > - Users can query each other's information stores
> > - No upper bound to the physical size of the repository
> >
> > Right now, I don't envisage a deep-noded store. Think of many Items,
> > each containing content and a little bunch of metadata (e.g. datetime,
> > list of keywords, etc.). The email analogy would be many email
> > messages, each with a body and a header.
> >
> > I am also thinking of implementing each user's content store as a
> > Workspace. Each workspace would have two top-level nodes hanging from
> > its root: Private and Public. Then each of those two nodes would
> > contain many, many content Items.
> >
> > Is there anything so far that wouldn't be well served by building on
> > top of Jackrabbit?
> >
> > Am I right in assuming (given my ideas above) that cross-workspace
> > queries are perfectly possible, and that all that is required is a
> > separate, logged-in Session to each one?
> >
> > Can you envisage any issues (performance or otherwise) with my
> > pitifully meagre outline? Any sage words of advice on how to best
> > start architecting my repository?
> >
> >
> > Many thanks!
> > --
> > Sean Dynan

Mime
View raw message