jackrabbit-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alexander Klimetschek <aklim...@day.com>
Subject Re: jackrabbit configuration in clustered environment
Date Fri, 06 Nov 2009 09:10:38 GMT
On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 08:39, Medha C Sutaria <msutaria@csc.com> wrote:
> We are using Jackrabbit (version 1.4.1) with liferay (version 5.2.2). It
> uses the following configuration -
> JCRHook + PersistenceManager + File system
> JCRHook vs FileSystemHook?
> PersistenceManager vs Datastore?
> FileSystem vs Database?
> if filesystem, sharing the file system? or using SAN?

You need to be more specific. Which persistence manager are you using?

Quick notes:
- bundle based persistence managers are best
- local dbs (like derby or h2) have better performance than remote dbs
- datastore will only be used for large binaries; using filedatastore
is a better choice than storing the binaries in a database (using a db
- FileSystem (element in repository.xml) is not important anymore,
does not influence peformance
- JCRHook seems to be a proprietary liferay component, so we
(jackrabbit devs) cannot give you any information on this
- if you do clustering and use the datastore, you will need a shared
file system, SAN is typically the best (but know your network

> 1. To select a different solution, migration of current documents to the
> new solutions has to be done

See here http://wiki.apache.org/jackrabbit/BackupAndMigration for some options.

> 2. The repository is increasing exponentially. The file system size is
> already 10 GB. Does jackrabbit support such large repositories? At what
> point will the performance start degrading?

Depends on what configuration you actually use.

> 3. What will it take to upgrade the jackrabbit version from 1.4 to 1.6?
> Will be require any migration?

AFAIK nothing would be required from 1.4 to 1.6. Minor version numbers
are meant to be backwards compatible in Jackrabbit.


Alexander Klimetschek

View raw message