manifoldcf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Karl Wright <daddy...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: ManifoldCF 2.0 plans
Date Wed, 18 Jun 2014 21:38:43 GMT
bq. What is "non-SQL data store" ? You mean to remove MFC's dependency to
PostgreSQL, MySQL, Derby etc?

See CONNECTORS-286.

bq. What do you think about this? Can MCF be dih replacement?  How is our
DB crawler compared to DIH?

In theory it could.  I'd hesitate before claiming feature-to-feature
compatibility though, and I'm not sure whether Solr people would officially
recommend MCF in any case, especially since they have wanted to solve
document security in their own way (but have never gotten around to it in
the 3+ years this first came to my attention).

Karl



On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 5:26 PM, Ahmet Arslan <iorixxx@yahoo.com.invalid>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> What is "non-SQL data store" ? You mean to remove MFC's dependency to
> PostgreSQL, MySQL, Derby etc?
>
>
> By the way solr guys are looking for a Data Import Handler (DIH)
> replacement.
>
> See for the thread : http://search-lucene.com/m/WwzTb2z1w7F
>
> DIH is mostly used to sync RDBMS to Solr.
>
> What do you think about this? Can MCF be dih replacement?
>
> How is our DB crawler compared to DIH?
>
> Ahmet
>
>
> On Wednesday, June 18, 2014 11:33 PM, Muhammed Olgun <mh.olgun@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I think that a non-SQL solution would be great. I have also two new ideas
> for GridFS connector,
>
> 1) Sharding support
> 2) Selectable seeding model.
>
> Muhammed
>
>
>
>
>
> On 18 Jun 2014, at 23:22, Karl Wright <daddywri@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Piergiorgio,
> >
> > Just to clarify -- I don't have a workable plan yet for a non-SQL data
> > store, so maybe that waits until 3.0.
> >
> > Karl
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Piergiorgio Lucidi <
> piergiorgio@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> +1 from me for breaking backwords compatibility and focusing on non-SQL
> >> data store.
> >>
> >> Piergiorgio
> >>
> >>
> >> 2014-06-18 18:19 GMT+02:00 Karl Wright <daddywri@gmail.com>:
> >>
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> By now it is becoming clear that ManifoldCF has accumulated a lot of
> >>> backwards-compatibility dead weight we have to carry around from
> release
> >> to
> >>> release.  However, ManifoldCF 2.0 will present an opportunity to break
> >>> backwards compatibility with the 1.x releases.  Originally, I was
> >> thinking
> >>> that MCF 2.0 would be the proper release vehicle for an implementation
> on
> >>> top of a non-SQL data store, but now I am looking at this instead as a
> >>> great way to clean out deprecated tabs, methods, and even whole
> >> connectors
> >>> from the codebase.
> >>>
> >>> I'd like to consider making the MCF 2.0 release be the next one after
> >> 1.7.
> >>> Since 1.7 is scheduled for end of August, 2.0 would come out some
> months
> >>> after that.  Please comment on whether you agree with this basic plan,
> or
> >>> you have other priorities we should know about. ;-)
> >>>
> >>> FWIW, if this *is* a good idea to you, please also list one or two main
> >>> areas we should work on for 2.0 that involve breaking backwards
> >>> compatibility.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Karl
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Piergiorgio Lucidi
> >>> Open Source ECM Specialist
> >>> http://www.open4dev.com
> >>>
> >>
>

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