You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@jackrabbit.apache.org by amsmota <am...@gmail.com> on 2008/05/06 11:56:09 UTC
Use of diferent or same schemaObjectPrefixes
I notice that if I have different schemaObjectPrefix for
A) Repository/FileSystem -> 1 table
B) Repository/Workspace/FileSystem -> 1 table
C) Repository/Workspace/PersistenceManager -> 4 tables
D) Repository/Versioning/FileSystem -> 1 table
E) Repository/Versioning/PersistenceManager -> 4 tables
A, B, D -> *fsentry
C, E -> *binval, *node, *prop, *refs
I end up with 11 tables. If I use a common schemaObjectPrefix (or if I use
the schemaObjectPrefix to configure my schema, see
http://www.nabble.com/Using-diferent-database-schemas-td16993168.html here )
I only get 5 tables.
Now what I want top know is what was the rationale behind the implementation
of this (optionally) different schemaObjectPrefix's. Is just a question of
housekeeping, to properly identify the different types of repository, to
prevent the tables getting to big? Or is there a more "profound" reason?
I need to know this to go ahead with the use of schemaObjectPrefix to define
my database schema or not.
Thanks all.
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Use-of-diferent-or-same-schemaObjectPrefixes-tp17079492p17079492.html
Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Use of diferent or same schemaObjectPrefixes
Posted by Stefan Guggisberg <st...@day.com>.
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 3:25 PM, amsmota <am...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hmm, actually I never looked at the BundleDbPersistenceManager, can you
> elaborate a little on what it does and why is preferred over
> DatabasePersistenceManager?
BundleDbPersistenceManager is the current default persistence manager.
instead of storing every node and property separately (like
SimpleDbPersistenceManager does) it stores a 'bundle' of the node and its
properties in a single table row, thus significantly reducing
network-roundtrips.
cheers
stefan
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
>
>
> Stefan Guggisberg-2 wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 6:33 PM, amsmota <am...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> The reason I'm asking this is because I see that exists 4 sets of .ddl in
> >> the
> >> application, and I changed only 2, corresponding to the
> >> DatabaseFileSystem /
> >> DatabasePersistenceManager. What are this other 2 for?
> >>
> >> org.apache.jackrabbit.core.journal
> >
> > those are used by o.a.j.c.journal.DatabaseJournal. if you'e not using the
> > clustering feature you don't have to care.
> >
> >> org.apache.jackrabbit.core.persistence.bundle
> >
> > those are used by o.a.j.c.persistence.bundle.BundleDbPersistenceManager
> > and
> > subclasses which are the (preferred) alternatives to
> > DatabasePersistenceManager
> > and subclasses.
> >
> > cheers
> > stefan
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> amsmota wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Do I have to be aware of other possible clashes besides
> >>> DatabaseFileSystem
> >>> / DatabasePersistenceManager ?
> >>>
> >>
> >> --
> >> View this message in context:
> >> http://www.nabble.com/Use-of-diferent-or-same-schemaObjectPrefixes-tp17079492p17128109.html
> >> Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Use-of-diferent-or-same-schemaObjectPrefixes-tp17079492p17208371.html
>
>
> Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
Re: Use of diferent or same schemaObjectPrefixes
Posted by amsmota <am...@gmail.com>.
Hmm, actually I never looked at the BundleDbPersistenceManager, can you
elaborate a little on what it does and why is preferred over
DatabasePersistenceManager?
Thanks.
Stefan Guggisberg-2 wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 6:33 PM, amsmota <am...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> The reason I'm asking this is because I see that exists 4 sets of .ddl in
>> the
>> application, and I changed only 2, corresponding to the
>> DatabaseFileSystem /
>> DatabasePersistenceManager. What are this other 2 for?
>>
>> org.apache.jackrabbit.core.journal
>
> those are used by o.a.j.c.journal.DatabaseJournal. if you'e not using the
> clustering feature you don't have to care.
>
>> org.apache.jackrabbit.core.persistence.bundle
>
> those are used by o.a.j.c.persistence.bundle.BundleDbPersistenceManager
> and
> subclasses which are the (preferred) alternatives to
> DatabasePersistenceManager
> and subclasses.
>
> cheers
> stefan
>
>>
>>
>>
>> amsmota wrote:
>>>
>>> Do I have to be aware of other possible clashes besides
>>> DatabaseFileSystem
>>> / DatabasePersistenceManager ?
>>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://www.nabble.com/Use-of-diferent-or-same-schemaObjectPrefixes-tp17079492p17128109.html
>> Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Use-of-diferent-or-same-schemaObjectPrefixes-tp17079492p17208371.html
Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Use of diferent or same schemaObjectPrefixes
Posted by Stefan Guggisberg <st...@day.com>.
On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 6:33 PM, amsmota <am...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The reason I'm asking this is because I see that exists 4 sets of .ddl in the
> application, and I changed only 2, corresponding to the DatabaseFileSystem /
> DatabasePersistenceManager. What are this other 2 for?
>
> org.apache.jackrabbit.core.journal
those are used by o.a.j.c.journal.DatabaseJournal. if you'e not using the
clustering feature you don't have to care.
> org.apache.jackrabbit.core.persistence.bundle
those are used by o.a.j.c.persistence.bundle.BundleDbPersistenceManager and
subclasses which are the (preferred) alternatives to DatabasePersistenceManager
and subclasses.
cheers
stefan
>
>
>
> amsmota wrote:
>>
>> Do I have to be aware of other possible clashes besides DatabaseFileSystem
>> / DatabasePersistenceManager ?
>>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Use-of-diferent-or-same-schemaObjectPrefixes-tp17079492p17128109.html
> Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
Re: Use of diferent or same schemaObjectPrefixes
Posted by amsmota <am...@gmail.com>.
The reason I'm asking this is because I see that exists 4 sets of .ddl in the
application, and I changed only 2, corresponding to the DatabaseFileSystem /
DatabasePersistenceManager. What are this other 2 for?
org.apache.jackrabbit.core.journal
org.apache.jackrabbit.core.persistence.bundle
amsmota wrote:
>
> Do I have to be aware of other possible clashes besides DatabaseFileSystem
> / DatabasePersistenceManager ?
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Use-of-diferent-or-same-schemaObjectPrefixes-tp17079492p17128109.html
Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Use of diferent or same schemaObjectPrefixes
Posted by amsmota <am...@gmail.com>.
Ok, different schemaObjectPrefix it is.
Do I have to be aware of other possible clashes besides DatabaseFileSystem /
DatabasePersistenceManager ?
Cheers.
Stefan Guggisberg-2 wrote:
>
>
> every DatabaseFileSystem and DatabasePersistenceManager instance that uses
> a shared db absolutely *needs* to specify a unique schemaObjectPrefix
> value.
> failing to do so will most probably lead to data corruption.
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Use-of-diferent-or-same-schemaObjectPrefixes-tp17079492p17104806.html
Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: Use of diferent or same schemaObjectPrefixes
Posted by Stefan Guggisberg <st...@day.com>.
On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 11:56 AM, amsmota <am...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I notice that if I have different schemaObjectPrefix for
>
> A) Repository/FileSystem -> 1 table
> B) Repository/Workspace/FileSystem -> 1 table
> C) Repository/Workspace/PersistenceManager -> 4 tables
> D) Repository/Versioning/FileSystem -> 1 table
> E) Repository/Versioning/PersistenceManager -> 4 tables
>
> A, B, D -> *fsentry
> C, E -> *binval, *node, *prop, *refs
>
> I end up with 11 tables. If I use a common schemaObjectPrefix (or if I use
> the schemaObjectPrefix to configure my schema, see
> http://www.nabble.com/Using-diferent-database-schemas-td16993168.html here )
> I only get 5 tables.
>
> Now what I want top know is what was the rationale behind the implementation
> of this (optionally) different schemaObjectPrefix's. Is just a question of
> housekeeping, to properly identify the different types of repository, to
> prevent the tables getting to big? Or is there a more "profound" reason?
every DatabaseFileSystem and DatabasePersistenceManager instance that uses
a shared db absolutely *needs* to specify a unique schemaObjectPrefix value.
failing to do so will most probably lead to data corruption.
an example:
api-level locks are currently persisted in the workspace FileSystem. multiple
wokspaces using identical schemaObjectPefix values could therefore potentially
overwrite/corrupt each others locks files.
cheers
stefan
>
> I need to know this to go ahead with the use of schemaObjectPrefix to define
> my database schema or not.
>
> Thanks all.
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Use-of-diferent-or-same-schemaObjectPrefixes-tp17079492p17079492.html
> Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>