Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jackrabbit-users-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: (qmail 8067 invoked from network); 4 Dec 2009 23:29:57 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 4 Dec 2009 23:29:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 20802 invoked by uid 500); 4 Dec 2009 23:29:56 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-jackrabbit-users-archive@jackrabbit.apache.org Received: (qmail 20760 invoked by uid 500); 4 Dec 2009 23:29:56 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@jackrabbit.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list users@jackrabbit.apache.org Received: (qmail 20746 invoked by uid 99); 4 Dec 2009 23:29:56 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Dec 2009 23:29:56 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of chadmichaeldavis@gmail.com designates 209.85.218.214 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.218.214] (HELO mail-bw0-f214.google.com) (209.85.218.214) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Dec 2009 23:29:54 +0000 Received: by bwz6 with SMTP id 6so2401706bwz.11 for ; Fri, 04 Dec 2009 15:29:32 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=QzZYRMe/W9u9rTTUufQDYqNe1lkZ3EtPZ6pCCFPogkk=; b=arSNIiVhgymqi0QnfkGwt11bTqtxtq+kIIQQBPDTjZosko2LExy4HLhvUxzUQlZSOl 9DalmZxKRcdZLhm77bVKe9zcmZWdXuwIU4lm2eSmR+O9OL7uanJqLNTkTAMIlxT1pXwl FwiX8FeoLwoB4oZmEfByDCjx1G8+Lv27lsOo8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=jr8iTFg0dkJaaaRPJ6uGCsyUo/3szKtpTZvcWcT1mhEZUIR9tg2yjnDOHaySHCEc3c fFNPaxuaZOt67lNao79U5MruMpYCIjBr0VMttZddvHXh1XiMi3bUUj9X65Bf/VfBH+m2 caS3K/L/MweTSWmX35ntRAPzwDffXj6rfVCBY= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.148.88 with SMTP id o24mr3890325bkv.182.1259969372766; Fri, 04 Dec 2009 15:29:32 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4fe4c4f50912041528v72dd03e6s238649457a70a597@mail.gmail.com> References: <4fe4c4f50912041528v72dd03e6s238649457a70a597@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2009 16:29:32 -0700 Message-ID: <4fe4c4f50912041529x52fbab4ewd11be304974bbae8@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: Filesystem versus PersistenceManager questions From: ChadDavis To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BTW, I'm using 2.0-beta3. On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 4:28 PM, ChadDavis wrot= e: > I'm reading the PersistenceManager FAQ [1]. =A0There's a part where it > discusses "What combination of FS and PM is the best choice?" =A0In > reading through this section I have a couple of questions: > > 1) I read elsewhere that the FS is only used for some administrative > stuff, like the search index and configuration. =A0Is this correct? =A0In > other words, the FS isn't a part of the storage for the actual repo > content, that's all done by the PM? > > 2) It appears as if there is no good file system backed PM . . . is > this accurate? =A0The bundleFsPM is described as non-production, read > only. =A0So, this kind of means that the FS is NOT a choice for backing > the content of my repo, correct? > > 3) Is the Derby PM considered production worthy? =A0Any reason not to use= it? > > > http://wiki.apache.org/jackrabbit/PersistenceManagerFAQ >