jackrabbit-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joseph Ottinger <j...@enigmastation.com>
Subject Re: Spring configuration?
Date Mon, 13 Sep 2010 13:12:32 GMT
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 8:54 AM, Thomas Müller <thomas.mueller@day.com>wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I think I understand your use case, but I'm afraid all I can tell is:
> it won't be easy. With the current Jackrabbit implementation, you need
> both a PersistenceManager and a FileSystem implementation. To run
> queries, you additionally need to use a SearchIndex implementation,
> the default one uses Apache Lucene (which in turn is not using the
> Jackrabbit FileSystem interface). Also, for large files most likely
> you want a DataStore implementation (probably the easiest to
> implement). Clustering uses it's own storage component, but maybe it's
> easier in your case to ignore that and write your own clustering,
> because the Jackrabbit clustering is based on the assumption that the
> PersistenceManager is shared for all cluster nodes.
>
> yeesh. Well, one of the things that my datastore mechanism provides is
cluster-neutral clustering - you don't have to have the different pieces
aware of each other to be able to cluster sanely. We can handle Lucene, too,
but you're right - the multiple storage mediums turn into a hassle. (I was
going to cross that bridge when I got to it.)



> Implementing all those components is a lot of work, and all that would
> be lost once Jackrabbit 3 is ready.
>
>
Well, we can only hope that Jackrabbit 3 hurries up, I suppose.

-- 
Joseph B. Ottinger
http://enigmastation.com

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message