From users-return-2947-apmail-jackrabbit-users-archive=jackrabbit.apache.org@jackrabbit.apache.org Mon Apr 16 23:32:33 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jackrabbit-users-archive@locus.apache.org Received: (qmail 64004 invoked from network); 16 Apr 2007 23:32:33 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 16 Apr 2007 23:32:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 16546 invoked by uid 500); 16 Apr 2007 23:32:36 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-jackrabbit-users-archive@jackrabbit.apache.org Received: (qmail 16532 invoked by uid 500); 16 Apr 2007 23:32:36 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@jackrabbit.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list users@jackrabbit.apache.org Received: (qmail 16511 invoked by uid 99); 16 Apr 2007 23:32:36 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 16 Apr 2007 16:32:36 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [202.62.63.67] (HELO mail.xbiosystem.com) (202.62.63.67) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 16 Apr 2007 16:32:29 -0700 Received: from localhost (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by mail.xbiosystem.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18C45239EBF for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2007 09:32:08 +1000 (EST) Received: from mail.xbiosystem.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (xbiosystem.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 19726-01 for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2007 09:32:06 +1000 (EST) Received: from FLEXO (eth2323.vic.adsl.internode.on.net [150.101.159.18]) by mail.xbiosystem.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D63A239DFF for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2007 09:32:06 +1000 (EST) From: "Daniel Murley" To: References: <9956844.post@talk.nabble.com> <9957486.post@talk.nabble.com> <1176386887.2708.1.camel@dev2.dbgroups.com> <510143ac0704150117m642800edud6a06d9b0edce959@mail.gmail.com> Subject: RE: Re: JackRabbit Vs Alfresco Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 09:33:52 +1000 Organization: Xbio Systems Pty Ltd Message-ID: <017d01c7807f$b17a9070$c401a8c0@FLEXO> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028 Thread-Index: Acd/NoiY6v0yBZbDS/CZAshpS6isSQBSNkag In-Reply-To: <510143ac0704150117m642800edud6a06d9b0edce959@mail.gmail.com> X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at xbiosystem.com X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org The RMI layer for alfresco is somewhat poor, and virtually unusable if you're not using Acegi for your security. If you're not using Acegi for your security, you can expect to be able to execute 2 - 3 commands before it says you're unauthenticated (my guess would be because Acegi uses ThreadLocals, and RMI can be executed on different threads?). The Jackrabbit RMI support is significantly better, and as such after struggling with Acegi for 3-4 weeks, chucked it and had Jackrabbit doing the same thing in 2-3 days. Daniel -----Original Message----- From: Jukka Zitting [mailto:jukka.zitting@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, 15 April 2007 6:17 PM To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org Subject: Re: Re: JackRabbit Vs Alfresco Hi, On 4/15/07, Danner, Russ wrote: > Another important thing to note about the implementation is that > currently the Alfresco JCR implementation has to run "in-process." Note that the same applies to by default also to Jackrabbit. You can use the jackrabbit-jcr-rmi remoting layer with any JCR implementation, so it should work fine also with Alfresco. BR, Jukka Zitting