jackrabbit-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Stefan Guggisberg" <stefan.guggisb...@day.com>
Subject Re: Database backed repositories
Date Thu, 24 Apr 2008 10:26:19 GMT
hi jared

On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 6:14 PM, Jared Graber <jared.graber@iaccap.com> wrote:
> I'm trying to find some best practices for repository configuration:
>
>
>
>  I need my data (nodes, properties, ,etc) to be stored in a DB so
>  obviously I would use a database persistence manager.
>
>  Does it matter if I use a local file system or db file system?  What
>  gets stored in the "filesystem"?

repository content (i.e. nodes & properties) are persisted through the
PersistenceManager abstraction.

repository 'meta data' and configurations (e.g. registered namespaces,
custom node type definitions,  locks, workspace configurations)
are persisted through the FileSystem abstraction.

the only notable exception is the lucene index which is always persisted
in the local file system (for performance reasons and since it's recoverable).

WRT to using DbFileSystem:

pro: if you configure jackrabbit to store everything in a single db you can
backup an entire repository easily.

con: since config files etc are stored in the db it's not that easy anymore to
manipulate/edit them (should you ever need to do so ;)

hope this helps
stefan

>
>
>
>  What are the pros and cons of the different approaches?
>
>
>
>  The wiki says:
>
>  If you want to store your data in a RDBMS, use
>  BundleDbPersistenceManager
>  <http://wiki.apache.org/jackrabbit/BundleDbPersistenceManager>  + either
>  LocalFileSystem or DbFileSystem.
>
>
>
>  But doesn't mention when to use LocalFileSystem vs DbFileSystem.
>
>

Mime
View raw message