> On 5.3.12 12:36, Marcel Reutegger wrote: > >> /** > >> * Returns the number of child nodes of this node. > >> * > >> * @return number of child nodes > >> */ > >> int getChildNodeCount(); > > > > this doesn't work well when you have concurrent child node > > operations. e.g. one session adds a child node while another > > session removes the child nodes. IMO it would be better if > > That interface represents an immutable state. So the child node count > will never change but rather reflect a snapshot in time.
ah, now I understand the confusion. I was not talking about a problem to provide the value in the context of the MK and MVCC with immutable state. that's clearly not an issue. I was talking about the problem to maintain this value further down the layer(s). the basic problem I see is when we'd like to support efficient, concurrent and distributed child node operations (add/remove) on large sets of child nodes, then the data structure that keeps the number of child nodes will be an area of contention. regards marcel
