El jue, 04-10-2007 a las 14:14 +0200, Stefan Guggisberg escribió: > On 10/4/07, Paco Avila wrote: > > El mié, 03-10-2007 a las 14:02 +0200, Stefan Guggisberg escribió: > > > On 10/2/07, Paco Avila wrote: > > > > El mar, 02-10-2007 a las 15:07 +0200, Thomas Mueller escribió: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > Property.getLength(): > > > > > Returns the length of the value of this property. Returns the length > > > > > in bytes if the value is a PropertyType.BINARY, otherwise it returns > > > > > the number of characters needed to display the value in its string > > > > > form. Returns -1 if the implementation cannot determine the length. > > > > > > > > > > Does this not work, or did I misunderstand the problem? > > > > > > > > I didn't notice the method :) Anyway, "Property.getLength()" is supposed > > > > to be so fast as getting the size stored in special a property? > > > > > > yes, in fact even faster ;) > > > > Do you mean that "node.getProperty("jcr:data").getLength()" is faster > > than "node.getProperty("my:size")? > > no. i was saying that > > property.getLenght(); > > is probably faster than > > node.getProperty("my:size").getLong(); > > i.e. i was assuming that you'd already read the property. > if that's not the case just reading a LONG property > is certainly faster that reading a BINARY property. not in my case, when I need to make repository statistics, and only need to get the stored data size no the data itself. Thanks for the tip anyway! :) -- GIT CONSULTORS www.git.es Tel: +34 971 498 310 Fax: +34 971 496 189 C/ Francesc Rover, 2B. 07003 Palma de Mallorca – Illes Balears (España)