jackrabbit-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Thomas Mueller" <thomas.tom.muel...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Question on jcr:deref usage
Date Fri, 24 Nov 2006 15:54:09 GMT
Hi,

> So I wouldn't dare to say "here is how I
> think things should be done".

Maybe you have some ideas how to extend the JCR API to simplify using
it, or just what additional features are required.

> This approach also has a draw-back: by treating Local file systems and RDB
> systems the same way - same set of features, same indexing & searching API
> (??),  a lot of good stuff from RDBMS are wasted.

Is this now not more an implementation issue (how to do it) than a
user issue (what features are required, how the API looks like)?

> These features are very useful even in querying structural data model

AFAIK, Lucene (not the RDBMS) is used to for queries (except for
direct, relative Node access and references).

> My personal experience is that production-level content management systems
> are more implemented on RDBMS than on local file system.

For me, the main reasons to use RDBMS are transaction support and speed.

> 2.  When presenting architecture design to a business client (usually with
> 'some' knowledge of the IT
>      systems/products), the first question would be "is this a serious
> design? why are all the data in
>      Blobs?". Although we as developers know that there are good reasons
> for that, it may not be easily
>      conveyed to the client.

I know, many people think like that. On the other hand, if using Blobs
is faster, and people don't wants to access the data store directly,
why not use Blobs?

Thomas

Mime
View raw message