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

Posted to dev@jackrabbit.apache.org by gsoap <gs...@yahoo.com> on 2007/06/01 15:47:23 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-tf3852411.html#a10913190
Sent from the Jackrabbit - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: XPath versus SQL in Jackrabbit

Posted by Julian Reschke <ju...@gmx.de>.

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

It doesn't matter.

> Does jackrabbit first translates SQL into XPath before execution? 

Both are parsed into an abstract query representation.

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

Best regards, Julian