jackrabbit-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Justin Edelson <justinedel...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: novice question - photo gallery
Date Sun, 25 Apr 2010 02:27:58 GMT
If content has a natural hierarchy, that would always be preferred to a
synthetic hierarchy like the md5 hash. Frequently, the creation date is
a good basis for a natural hierarchy. In a photo gallery, you could also
think of "albums" as being the hierarchy.


On 4/24/10 9:35 PM, Christopher M. Logan wrote:
> I subscribe to the jackrabbit mailing list and this response made me think.. Why?? Using
a check sum to build a folder structure.?. Shouldn't the folder structure be understandable...
If that is recommended... I really must have missed the purpose of jcr...
> ------Original Message------
> From: Matt Meola
> To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
> ReplyTo: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
> Subject: Re: novice question - photo gallery
> Sent: Apr 24, 2010 6:21 PM
> Michael Yin wrote:
>> I believe that a fairly flat structure is not the most efficient for jackrabbit.
Maybe use dates (month/year) or some other grouping to further build the tree?
>> -mike
> Indeed, just about all the advice out there is "go deep" instead of "go
> wide".  One possible way to do that would be to calculate, say, and MD5
> checksum from the file (its name, or its contents, whatever), and take
> the pairs of digits and make each of those pairs a folder.
> Example:  an image named "blub", gives an md5 hash of
> 455523d86a8a1ab7c7d33208fe0219e7, which would yield a folder structure of
> data/pictures/gallery/45/55/23/d8/6a/8a/1a/b7/c7/d3/32/08/fe/02/19/e7/original
> data/pictures/gallery/45/55/23/d8/6a/8a/1a/b7/c7/d3/32/08/fe/02/19/e7/1024x768
> data/pictures/gallery/45/55/23/d8/6a/8a/1a/b7/c7/d3/32/08/fe/02/19/e7/64x64
>    ...
> You could take them in groups of three, or four, or you could only go so
> far with it (not using the entire checksum) -- whatever you like. 
> Regardless, you ought to be able to get a reasonably balanced tree over
> time.
> Just my two cents...

View raw message