Mailing-List: contact users-help@jackrabbit.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of michael.neale@gmail.com
 designates 64.233.162.235 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references;
        b=KCiqzVYf1jiwGcRfPszJ5N5YfhjZeCIGKCF24jXsRwVm6bi7FZaWvEYWLBXbpCRGtaWxsRHjXw5Iw+BkueXtr+taGkAqDm6rKceKDNFQ//Q7rrBU4Yk837wFzH36rob1SiqmuGpSSTH6wQBd9IWGNld+dCki9y7Kn7L9bUkqF8k=
Message-ID: <96ab3ced0702212008t6718b5fcy76ed6aba6fcacf5f@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 14:08:51 +1000
From: "Michael Neale" <michael.neale@gmail.com>
To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
Subject: Re: Persistence Manager in Production Environment
In-Reply-To: <90a8d1c00702210454g1e21fb83j7e89e5727c75afb4@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_Part_24857_2031014.1172117331857"
References: <F186AC080E44C146BBE4A33472CFA79FE8C239@mxs01.tirol.local>
	 <90a8d1c00702210233h7a205a75q75de4b7b9abbea0a@mail.gmail.com>
	 <F186AC080E44C146BBE4A33472CFA79FE8C293@mxs01.tirol.local>
	 <90a8d1c00702210454g1e21fb83j7e89e5727c75afb4@mail.gmail.com>

------=_Part_24857_2031014.1172117331857
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

Stephan - isn't this needed so JCR transactions can participate in a wide
JTA transaction?
I find the suggestion otherwise quite alarming !

On 2/21/07, Stefan Guggisberg <stefan.guggisberg@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 2/21/07, K=D6LL Claus <C.KOELL@tirol.gv.at> wrote:
> > hi stefan,
> >
> > thanks for your information ..
> > do you prefer to use the j2c adapter in a production environment
> > to get a xasession (atomic transaction) ? the problem for me is that we
> are running in a websphere environemnt
> > and i'm not able to run the j2c adapter on it @see JCR JCR-743.
>
> personally i don't think that it is a good idea to use managed
> connections underneath jackrabbit. the persistence layer of jackrabbit
> should imo be as close to the backend as possible, i.e. control the
> lifecycle of the jdbc connection used. but that's a different topic.
>
> > Maby somebody has experiences with websphere ??
>
> i don't :)
>
> cheers
> stefan
>
> >
> >
> > -----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht-----
> > Von: Stefan Guggisberg [mailto:stefan.guggisberg@gmail.com]
> > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 21. Februar 2007 11:34
> > An: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
> > Betreff: Re: Persistence Manager in Production Environment
> >
> > i'd suggest, for now, using jackrabbit's default configuration, i.e.
> > DerbyPersistenceManager, since it's been extensively tested and since
> > it is pretty fast (considerably faster than the oracle pm).
> >
> > cheers
> > stefan
> >
> > On 2/21/07, K=D6LL Claus <C.KOELL@tirol.gv.at> wrote:
> > > We are on the road to use jackrabbit in our production environment bu=
t
> i'm not sure
> > > which persistence manager we should use.
> > >
> > > I have made some tests with the j2c adapter in combination with the
> oracle db pm
> > > to get a atomar transaction through the pm.
> > > A reason for db is also the easy way to backup/restore the data.
> > >
> > > On the other hand is the filesystem, no atomar transaction but it is
> fast. we think we get about 1-2 Million documents in jackrabbit
> > > and then the backup is no more really possible on filesystem beacuse
> if i use objectpersistenmanager i get about
> > > 6-10 files per node on fs (6*2Million files effectivity). On crash to
> recover these files take really long :-)
> > >
> > > A good message is that day will offer there pm's, so the node
> propertys will no more be stored in seperate files ..
> > >
> > > I hope i get some experience ...
> > > thanks
> > > claus
> > >
> >
>

------=_Part_24857_2031014.1172117331857--