jackrabbit-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alexandru Popescu ☀" <the.mindstorm.mailingl...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: ObjectPersistenceManager vs SimpleDbPersistenceManager
Date Thu, 09 Aug 2007 15:50:41 GMT
On 8/9/07, Thomas Mueller <thomas.tom.mueller@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I suggest to use a Bundle Database Persistence Manager, for example:
> org.apache.jackrabbit.core.persistence.bundle.DerbyPersistenceManager
> ... or another database. The advantages are:
>
> - More stable than ObjectPersistenceManager
> - Faster than SimpleDbPersistenceManager
>
> Thomas
>

IMO Phillip is after a more advanced BundledPM:one that can fetch
children in the same op. I suppose he can write his own based on the
current ones.

./alex
--
.w( the_mindstorm )p.

> On 8/7/07, Phillip Rhodes <spamsucks@rhoderunner.com> wrote:
> > Hello everyone,
> >
> > I did some debugging for my performance problems with SimpleDbPersistenceManager.
> > I ran SimpleDbPersistenceManager with jdbclogger and found that Jackrabbit will
issue 2+ sql queries for each node as I iterator through the NodeIterator.  This does not
scale well for me.
> >
> > I am considering switching my workspace to use the ObjectPersistenceManager .  I
understand it is not reliable as the SimpleDbPersistenceManager, but since I won't be issuing
400+ database queries, I hope the performance for my application will improve.
> >
> > Am I risking the entire repository becoming corrupt, or just a few nodes becoming
corrupt?  I don't mind a few nodes becoming corrupt, but if the entire repo can become corrupt
if the repository is killed, I would appreciate knowing this!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Thank you as always.
> > Phillip
> >
> >
> >
>

Mime
View raw message