jackrabbit-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Cheng Zhang <zhangyongji...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: session save and performance question
Date Sat, 24 Jan 2009 01:13:33 GMT
Hi Mark & all,

What I'm doing currently is to use Jackrabbit to store XML document. Each XML element's attribute
will be mapped to a node property. And each XML text element, for example "<age>13</age>",
will be also mapped to node property. All other XML elements are mapped to a jackrabbit node.

I'm now doubting if my case is the right use case for Jackrabbit. In my case, one XML document
will be mapped to 500 node/child-nodes. If I have 1 million xml documents, it means 500M nodes
will be created and indexed. 

Or I only map those nodes/properties I'm interested and in addition store the xml in a file
node.

Best,
Kevin



----- Original Message ----
From: Mark Nüßler <mark.nuessler@9elements.com>
To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 1:38:49 PM
Subject: Re: session save and performance question

Hello Kevin,

i think you are right, when saying that saving the session is cost
intensive. but ... it depends on ...

1. how your application works internally
    - do you really have to save the session every time
      or can you work with a transaction concept ?
2. what kind of structure you use
    - flat or hierachical
3. if you need/use mix:versioning
4. .... maybe others i've not mentioned here ?

i made some tests regarding 'invisible' structure nodes
vs a flat hierarchy when adding 50k content nodes.
[50k is a small amount within my current project]

it is always better to have a kind of structure above
your content nodes, when you exceed x numbers of child-nodes.

because i haven't done all of the tests, i am not really sure
what i would suggest for x - the userlist says ~10k, anywhere
else (or was it an old entry ?) mentioned 4k.

@Kevin, if not done yet, read some of the old list-entries


best regards

derMark


Cheng Zhang schrieb:
> I saw session saving costs too much time. I guest it might be caused by too many nodes
to be saved. what's the best practice to save the session to get the best performance? 
> Thanks a lot,
> Kevin
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.12/1911
- Release Date: 23.01.2009 07:28
> 


Mime
View raw message