Hi, Am 23.02.2012 um 10:50 schrieb Thomas Mueller:
> Hi, > >> option.transactions.supported = true > > > Is this JTA, right? Is it really required? While I don't like it either, some people make up a case for it.... So, if it can "easily" be supported, I think it would be a plus in the enterprise environment ... > >> shareable nodes >> it shouldn't be hard to implement them properly when starting from >> scratch. > > In my (old) prototype they caused a rather big architectural change. I > wouldn't support them if possible. > > >>> node.type.management.orderable.child.nodes.supported = false >> >> why? in CQ we rely on the ability to have orderable child nodes. > > The problem is we want to support large child node lists, and for this > case keeping them ordered is expensive (possible, but more complex, and > will slow down adding/removing child nodes to such nodes by factor 2-3). > > Currently, small child node lists (less than 2000 child nodes or so) are > orderable, but large ones are not. I understand, but we need it ;-) > >> i would appreciate if XPATH was still being supported. > > What about if we support a (to be defined) subset of XPATH? For example by > converting it to SQL2. Whatever the definition will be, chances are that a subset would be sufficient. Yet, I would assume XPath would be internally converted to JQOM and not to SQL2-to-JQOM ... But this is another story, probably. Regards Felix > > Regards, > Thomas >
