jackrabbit-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Miro Walker" <miro.wal...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Database backed repositories
Date Thu, 24 Apr 2008 08:38:29 GMT
The reason for using a DBFileSystem is that some "transactional" data
is stored in the filesystem, so in the case of complete local
filesystem loss, or other similar situations such as the use of
replicated databases for HR / DR purposes, the full repository
configuration may not be recoverable.

If my memory serves correctly, the relevant data that's stored in the
filesystem is the workspace.xml for each workspace that's created. If
your application creates workspaces dynamically, then any newly
created workspaces would be lost in the case of filesystem loss. Of
course, if your workspace configuration is static or changes rarely,
then recovery from disk backups may be sufficient.

 miro




On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 5:14 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"?
>
>
>
>  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