On Oct 4, 2006, at 9:33 AM, Thomas Mueller wrote:
Hi,
I agree. Of course there are other (may be better) ways to achieve
the same
without such problems, like using a deeper hierarchy. But the flat
hierarchy
is an important use case IMO. Many developers are used to this, and
it will
be hard to educate them to do it in a different way. I think it
should be
considered to change the implementation to allow fast addition of
child
nodes to a node. I'm not sure if this change alone will solve all
problems
(may be not).
At the same time, I think the current model of node references
should be
changed to allow O(1) time when adding or removing a reference to a
node. In
my opinion, the same mechanism could be used for references and for
child
nodes.
I definitely second these ideas.
We are currently implementing a wiki which calls for flat hierarchies
(yes you can invent some hierarchies but there is no real hierarchy
in the data so it's more like adding unnecessary complexity).
We are also running against the limitations of the current references
implementation (all references of a node in a blob and therefore
truncation if you got a LOT of references).
By the way - is there really no rdbms-based persistence manager out
there using proper relations instead of blobs for references?
- stefan
