You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to users@jackrabbit.apache.org by gsoap <gs...@yahoo.com> on 2007/06/01 15:46:46 UTC

XPath versus SQL in Jackrabbit

Hi,

I want to know which one of XPath/SQL is fastest (optimal) while using
Jackrabbit?

Does jackrabbit first translates SQL into XPath before execution?

Is there any underlying overhead of translation between XPath or SQL or vice
versa?

Thanks.
-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/XPath-versus-SQL-in-Jackrabbit-tf3852409.html#a10913188
Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: XPath versus SQL in Jackrabbit

Posted by Marcel Reutegger <ma...@gmx.net>.

gsoap wrote:
> I want to know which one of XPath/SQL is fastest (optimal) while using
> Jackrabbit?

they are both equally fast.

> Does jackrabbit first translates SQL into XPath before execution?

no, both syntaxes are first translated into a jackrabbit internal query tree 
representation and then executed.

> Is there any underlying overhead of translation between XPath or SQL or vice
> versa?

jackrabbit does not translate between the two languages. or do you want to 
translate statements in your application?

regards
  marcel