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

Posted to dev@jackrabbit.apache.org by Felix Meschberger <Fe...@day.com> on 2006/01/03 11:44:18 UTC

JCR-RMI Iterator support

Hi Jukka,

To provide for extensibility of the JCR-RMI implementation I suggest to 
make the MAX_BUFFER_SIZE field and optimizeIterator method protected in 
the ServerAdapterFactory class.

What do you think ?

Find attached a patch file with the suggested modification.

Regards
Felix

Re: JCR-RMI Iterator support

Posted by Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>.

Hi,

On 1/4/06, Felix Meschberger <Fe...@day.com> wrote:
> On the other hand, I am not sure, whether the AdapterFactory itself is
> the right place for this kind of thing. Maybe this should be
> "outsourced" into some kind of IteratorFactory.

You're probably right. The RemoteAdapterFactory interface is getting
quite crowded nowadays, so perhaps we should introduce some more
tightly scoped factory interfaces to make the package more easily
configurable. Though I kind of like the facade nature of the
RemoteAdapterFactory interface.

BR,

Jukka Zitting

--
Yukatan - http://yukatan.fi/ - info@yukatan.fi
Software craftmanship, JCR consulting, and Java development

Re: JCR-RMI Iterator support

Posted by Felix Meschberger <Fe...@day.com>.

Hi,

I wasn't aware of that. Sounds interesting, too :-)

On the other hand, I am not sure, whether the AdapterFactory itself is 
the right place for this kind of thing. Maybe this should be 
"outsourced" into some kind of IteratorFactory.

Regarsd
Felix

Jukka Zitting schrieb:
> Hi,
>
> On 1/4/06, Felix Meschberger <Fe...@day.com> wrote:
>   
>> Thanks alot. Good thing. Just one question: Could it be, that the
>> proposal to make ServerAdapterFactory.optimizeIterator protected got lost ?
>>     
>
> Ah, sorry. I ended up considering whether it would make sense to make
> the default ServerAdapterFactory.optimizeIterator() a no-op, and have
> a separate BufferingServerAdapterFactory subclass that would contain
> the bufferSize property and override the optimizeIterator() method.
>
> That would be a more orthogonal design, but as long as we don't have
> many competing optimization mechanisms, it's probably easier to have
> the default mechanism right there in the base class. Committed in
> revision 365897.
>
> BR,
>
> Jukka Zitting
>
> --
> Yukatan - http://yukatan.fi/ - info@yukatan.fi
> Software craftmanship, JCR consulting, and Java development
>

Re: JCR-RMI Iterator support

Posted by Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>.

Hi,

On 1/4/06, Felix Meschberger <Fe...@day.com> wrote:
> Thanks alot. Good thing. Just one question: Could it be, that the
> proposal to make ServerAdapterFactory.optimizeIterator protected got lost ?

Ah, sorry. I ended up considering whether it would make sense to make
the default ServerAdapterFactory.optimizeIterator() a no-op, and have
a separate BufferingServerAdapterFactory subclass that would contain
the bufferSize property and override the optimizeIterator() method.

That would be a more orthogonal design, but as long as we don't have
many competing optimization mechanisms, it's probably easier to have
the default mechanism right there in the base class. Committed in
revision 365897.

BR,

Jukka Zitting

--
Yukatan - http://yukatan.fi/ - info@yukatan.fi
Software craftmanship, JCR consulting, and Java development

Re: JCR-RMI Iterator support

Posted by Felix Meschberger <Fe...@day.com>.

Hi Jukka,

Thanks alot. Good thing. Just one question: Could it be, that the 
proposal to make ServerAdapterFactory.optimizeIterator protected got lost ?

Thanks and Regards
Felix

Jukka Zitting schrieb:
> Hi Felix,
>
> Thanks for the comment. Now that I think of it I'd actually go a bit
> further and make the buffer size an optional parameter for the
> ServerAdapterFactory constructor. I'll commit the change in a minute.
>
> BR,
>
> Jukka Zitting
>
> --
> Yukatan - http://yukatan.fi/ - info@yukatan.fi
> Software craftmanship, JCR consulting, and Java development
>

Re: JCR-RMI Iterator support

Posted by Jukka Zitting <ju...@gmail.com>.

Hi Felix,

Thanks for the comment. Now that I think of it I'd actually go a bit
further and make the buffer size an optional parameter for the
ServerAdapterFactory constructor. I'll commit the change in a minute.

BR,

Jukka Zitting

--
Yukatan - http://yukatan.fi/ - info@yukatan.fi
Software craftmanship, JCR consulting, and Java development