You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@jackrabbit.apache.org by KÖLL Claus <C....@TIROL.GV.AT> on 2007/02/21 08:31:10 UTC
Persistence Manager in Production Environment
We are on the road to use jackrabbit in our production environment but i'm not sure
which persistence manager we should use.
I have made some tests with the j2c adapter in combination with the oracle db pm
to get a atomar transaction through the pm.
A reason for db is also the easy way to backup/restore the data.
On the other hand is the filesystem, no atomar transaction but it is fast. we think we get about 1-2 Million documents in jackrabbit
and then the backup is no more really possible on filesystem beacuse if i use objectpersistenmanager i get about
6-10 files per node on fs (6*2Million files effectivity). On crash to recover these files take really long :-)
A good message is that day will offer there pm's, so the node propertys will no more be stored in seperate files ..
I hope i get some experience ...
thanks
claus
Re: Persistence Manager in Production Environment
Posted by Alexandru Popescu <th...@gmail.com>.
On 2/21/07, KÖLL Claus <C....@tirol.gv.at> wrote:
> do you use the SimpleDbPersistenceManager for berkleydb ?
>
Nope... there is a special PM for BerkleyDB in the contrib folder.
Because of the licensing differences Jackrabbit (ASF) cannot
distribute it, but building it is a no-brainer.
./alex
--
.w( the_mindstorm )p.
_____________________________________
Alexandru Popescu, OSS Evangelist
TestNG/Groovy/AspectJ/WebWork/more...
Information Queue ~ www.InfoQ.com
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Alexandru Popescu [mailto:the.mindstorm.mailinglist@gmail.com]
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 21. Februar 2007 11:39
> An: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: Persistence Manager in Production Environment
>
> On 2/21/07, Stefan Guggisberg <st...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > i'd suggest, for now, using jackrabbit's default configuration, i.e.
> > DerbyPersistenceManager, since it's been extensively tested and since
> > it is pretty fast (considerably faster than the oracle pm).
> >
> > cheers
> > stefan
> >
>
> I am quite happy with BerkleyDB (indeed there was no need to share the storage).
>
> ./alex
> --
> .w( the_mindstorm )p.
> _____________________________________
> Alexandru Popescu, OSS Evangelist
> TestNG/Groovy/AspectJ/WebWork/more...
> Information Queue ~ www.InfoQ.com
>
> > On 2/21/07, KÖLL Claus <C....@tirol.gv.at> wrote:
> > > We are on the road to use jackrabbit in our production environment but i'm not sure
> > > which persistence manager we should use.
> > >
> > > I have made some tests with the j2c adapter in combination with the oracle db pm
> > > to get a atomar transaction through the pm.
> > > A reason for db is also the easy way to backup/restore the data.
> > >
> > > On the other hand is the filesystem, no atomar transaction but it is fast. we think we get about 1-2 Million documents in jackrabbit
> > > and then the backup is no more really possible on filesystem beacuse if i use objectpersistenmanager i get about
> > > 6-10 files per node on fs (6*2Million files effectivity). On crash to recover these files take really long :-)
> > >
> > > A good message is that day will offer there pm's, so the node propertys will no more be stored in seperate files ..
> > >
> > > I hope i get some experience ...
> > > thanks
> > > claus
> > >
> >
>
AW: Persistence Manager in Production Environment
Posted by KÖLL Claus <C....@TIROL.GV.AT>.
do you use the SimpleDbPersistenceManager for berkleydb ?
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Alexandru Popescu [mailto:the.mindstorm.mailinglist@gmail.com]
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 21. Februar 2007 11:39
An: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
Betreff: Re: Persistence Manager in Production Environment
On 2/21/07, Stefan Guggisberg <st...@gmail.com> wrote:
> i'd suggest, for now, using jackrabbit's default configuration, i.e.
> DerbyPersistenceManager, since it's been extensively tested and since
> it is pretty fast (considerably faster than the oracle pm).
>
> cheers
> stefan
>
I am quite happy with BerkleyDB (indeed there was no need to share the storage).
./alex
--
.w( the_mindstorm )p.
_____________________________________
Alexandru Popescu, OSS Evangelist
TestNG/Groovy/AspectJ/WebWork/more...
Information Queue ~ www.InfoQ.com
> On 2/21/07, KÖLL Claus <C....@tirol.gv.at> wrote:
> > We are on the road to use jackrabbit in our production environment but i'm not sure
> > which persistence manager we should use.
> >
> > I have made some tests with the j2c adapter in combination with the oracle db pm
> > to get a atomar transaction through the pm.
> > A reason for db is also the easy way to backup/restore the data.
> >
> > On the other hand is the filesystem, no atomar transaction but it is fast. we think we get about 1-2 Million documents in jackrabbit
> > and then the backup is no more really possible on filesystem beacuse if i use objectpersistenmanager i get about
> > 6-10 files per node on fs (6*2Million files effectivity). On crash to recover these files take really long :-)
> >
> > A good message is that day will offer there pm's, so the node propertys will no more be stored in seperate files ..
> >
> > I hope i get some experience ...
> > thanks
> > claus
> >
>
Re: Persistence Manager in Production Environment
Posted by Alexandru Popescu <th...@gmail.com>.
On 2/21/07, Stefan Guggisberg <st...@gmail.com> wrote:
> i'd suggest, for now, using jackrabbit's default configuration, i.e.
> DerbyPersistenceManager, since it's been extensively tested and since
> it is pretty fast (considerably faster than the oracle pm).
>
> cheers
> stefan
>
I am quite happy with BerkleyDB (indeed there was no need to share the storage).
./alex
--
.w( the_mindstorm )p.
_____________________________________
Alexandru Popescu, OSS Evangelist
TestNG/Groovy/AspectJ/WebWork/more...
Information Queue ~ www.InfoQ.com
> On 2/21/07, KÖLL Claus <C....@tirol.gv.at> wrote:
> > We are on the road to use jackrabbit in our production environment but i'm not sure
> > which persistence manager we should use.
> >
> > I have made some tests with the j2c adapter in combination with the oracle db pm
> > to get a atomar transaction through the pm.
> > A reason for db is also the easy way to backup/restore the data.
> >
> > On the other hand is the filesystem, no atomar transaction but it is fast. we think we get about 1-2 Million documents in jackrabbit
> > and then the backup is no more really possible on filesystem beacuse if i use objectpersistenmanager i get about
> > 6-10 files per node on fs (6*2Million files effectivity). On crash to recover these files take really long :-)
> >
> > A good message is that day will offer there pm's, so the node propertys will no more be stored in seperate files ..
> >
> > I hope i get some experience ...
> > thanks
> > claus
> >
>
Re: Persistence Manager in Production Environment
Posted by Michael Neale <mi...@gmail.com>.
right - ok thats cool then, I was getting worried, but thats fine.
So a "best practice" is to let jackrabbit control the JDBC connections it
uses?
I am *guessing* this is due to the fact that the different connections may
be to disparate databases - or some persistence managers using the
filesystem itself - and jackrabbit tries to co-ordinate this as part of a
JTA transaction?
Michael.
On 2/22/07, Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 2/22/07, Michael Neale <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Stephan - isn't this needed so JCR transactions can participate in a
> wide
> > JTA transaction?
> > I find the suggestion otherwise quite alarming !
>
> Jackrabbit explicitly manages it's part of a distributed transaction,
> and having the underlying database connection externally managed
> actually breaks the transaction support within Jackrabbit.
>
> BR,
>
> Jukka Zitting
>
Re: Persistence Manager in Production Environment
Posted by Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
On 2/22/07, Michael Neale <mi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Stephan - isn't this needed so JCR transactions can participate in a wide
> JTA transaction?
> I find the suggestion otherwise quite alarming !
Jackrabbit explicitly manages it's part of a distributed transaction,
and having the underlying database connection externally managed
actually breaks the transaction support within Jackrabbit.
BR,
Jukka Zitting
Re: Persistence Manager in Production Environment
Posted by Michael Neale <mi...@gmail.com>.
Stephan - isn't this needed so JCR transactions can participate in a wide
JTA transaction?
I find the suggestion otherwise quite alarming !
On 2/21/07, Stefan Guggisberg <st...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 2/21/07, KÖLL Claus <C....@tirol.gv.at> wrote:
> > hi stefan,
> >
> > thanks for your information ..
> > do you prefer to use the j2c adapter in a production environment
> > to get a xasession (atomic transaction) ? the problem for me is that we
> are running in a websphere environemnt
> > and i'm not able to run the j2c adapter on it @see JCR JCR-743.
>
> personally i don't think that it is a good idea to use managed
> connections underneath jackrabbit. the persistence layer of jackrabbit
> should imo be as close to the backend as possible, i.e. control the
> lifecycle of the jdbc connection used. but that's a different topic.
>
> > Maby somebody has experiences with websphere ??
>
> i don't :)
>
> cheers
> stefan
>
> >
> >
> > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > Von: Stefan Guggisberg [mailto:stefan.guggisberg@gmail.com]
> > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 21. Februar 2007 11:34
> > An: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
> > Betreff: Re: Persistence Manager in Production Environment
> >
> > i'd suggest, for now, using jackrabbit's default configuration, i.e.
> > DerbyPersistenceManager, since it's been extensively tested and since
> > it is pretty fast (considerably faster than the oracle pm).
> >
> > cheers
> > stefan
> >
> > On 2/21/07, KÖLL Claus <C....@tirol.gv.at> wrote:
> > > We are on the road to use jackrabbit in our production environment but
> i'm not sure
> > > which persistence manager we should use.
> > >
> > > I have made some tests with the j2c adapter in combination with the
> oracle db pm
> > > to get a atomar transaction through the pm.
> > > A reason for db is also the easy way to backup/restore the data.
> > >
> > > On the other hand is the filesystem, no atomar transaction but it is
> fast. we think we get about 1-2 Million documents in jackrabbit
> > > and then the backup is no more really possible on filesystem beacuse
> if i use objectpersistenmanager i get about
> > > 6-10 files per node on fs (6*2Million files effectivity). On crash to
> recover these files take really long :-)
> > >
> > > A good message is that day will offer there pm's, so the node
> propertys will no more be stored in seperate files ..
> > >
> > > I hope i get some experience ...
> > > thanks
> > > claus
> > >
> >
>
Re: Persistence Manager in Production Environment
Posted by Stefan Guggisberg <st...@gmail.com>.
On 2/21/07, KÖLL Claus <C....@tirol.gv.at> wrote:
> hi stefan,
>
> thanks for your information ..
> do you prefer to use the j2c adapter in a production environment
> to get a xasession (atomic transaction) ? the problem for me is that we are running in a websphere environemnt
> and i'm not able to run the j2c adapter on it @see JCR JCR-743.
personally i don't think that it is a good idea to use managed
connections underneath jackrabbit. the persistence layer of jackrabbit
should imo be as close to the backend as possible, i.e. control the
lifecycle of the jdbc connection used. but that's a different topic.
> Maby somebody has experiences with websphere ??
i don't :)
cheers
stefan
>
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Stefan Guggisberg [mailto:stefan.guggisberg@gmail.com]
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 21. Februar 2007 11:34
> An: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: Persistence Manager in Production Environment
>
> i'd suggest, for now, using jackrabbit's default configuration, i.e.
> DerbyPersistenceManager, since it's been extensively tested and since
> it is pretty fast (considerably faster than the oracle pm).
>
> cheers
> stefan
>
> On 2/21/07, KÖLL Claus <C....@tirol.gv.at> wrote:
> > We are on the road to use jackrabbit in our production environment but i'm not sure
> > which persistence manager we should use.
> >
> > I have made some tests with the j2c adapter in combination with the oracle db pm
> > to get a atomar transaction through the pm.
> > A reason for db is also the easy way to backup/restore the data.
> >
> > On the other hand is the filesystem, no atomar transaction but it is fast. we think we get about 1-2 Million documents in jackrabbit
> > and then the backup is no more really possible on filesystem beacuse if i use objectpersistenmanager i get about
> > 6-10 files per node on fs (6*2Million files effectivity). On crash to recover these files take really long :-)
> >
> > A good message is that day will offer there pm's, so the node propertys will no more be stored in seperate files ..
> >
> > I hope i get some experience ...
> > thanks
> > claus
> >
>
AW: Persistence Manager in Production Environment
Posted by KÖLL Claus <C....@TIROL.GV.AT>.
hi stefan,
thanks for your information ..
do you prefer to use the j2c adapter in a production environment
to get a xasession (atomic transaction) ? the problem for me is that we are running in a websphere environemnt
and i'm not able to run the j2c adapter on it @see JCR JCR-743.
Maby somebody has experiences with websphere ??
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Stefan Guggisberg [mailto:stefan.guggisberg@gmail.com]
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 21. Februar 2007 11:34
An: users@jackrabbit.apache.org
Betreff: Re: Persistence Manager in Production Environment
i'd suggest, for now, using jackrabbit's default configuration, i.e.
DerbyPersistenceManager, since it's been extensively tested and since
it is pretty fast (considerably faster than the oracle pm).
cheers
stefan
On 2/21/07, KÖLL Claus <C....@tirol.gv.at> wrote:
> We are on the road to use jackrabbit in our production environment but i'm not sure
> which persistence manager we should use.
>
> I have made some tests with the j2c adapter in combination with the oracle db pm
> to get a atomar transaction through the pm.
> A reason for db is also the easy way to backup/restore the data.
>
> On the other hand is the filesystem, no atomar transaction but it is fast. we think we get about 1-2 Million documents in jackrabbit
> and then the backup is no more really possible on filesystem beacuse if i use objectpersistenmanager i get about
> 6-10 files per node on fs (6*2Million files effectivity). On crash to recover these files take really long :-)
>
> A good message is that day will offer there pm's, so the node propertys will no more be stored in seperate files ..
>
> I hope i get some experience ...
> thanks
> claus
>
Re: Persistence Manager in Production Environment
Posted by Stefan Guggisberg <st...@gmail.com>.
i'd suggest, for now, using jackrabbit's default configuration, i.e.
DerbyPersistenceManager, since it's been extensively tested and since
it is pretty fast (considerably faster than the oracle pm).
cheers
stefan
On 2/21/07, KÖLL Claus <C....@tirol.gv.at> wrote:
> We are on the road to use jackrabbit in our production environment but i'm not sure
> which persistence manager we should use.
>
> I have made some tests with the j2c adapter in combination with the oracle db pm
> to get a atomar transaction through the pm.
> A reason for db is also the easy way to backup/restore the data.
>
> On the other hand is the filesystem, no atomar transaction but it is fast. we think we get about 1-2 Million documents in jackrabbit
> and then the backup is no more really possible on filesystem beacuse if i use objectpersistenmanager i get about
> 6-10 files per node on fs (6*2Million files effectivity). On crash to recover these files take really long :-)
>
> A good message is that day will offer there pm's, so the node propertys will no more be stored in seperate files ..
>
> I hope i get some experience ...
> thanks
> claus
>