On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 6:00 PM, Felix Meschberger <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > I see and understand your points. But then, when it comes to clustering, > generating a strictly monotone sequential ID without collisions without > tampering performance is probably a hard problem to solve, right ?
That was exactly my point ;-) If we have a internal storage id (for example a db PK) and a different (jcr:) uuid, would those have a 1-to-1 mapping? Are the nodes retrieved by looking up some (path based) uuid or by the id (PK)? If the latter is true then you still need an index on the uuids and you would have the same "performance problem". Or am I mistaken? I do agree with Jukka that we really need some numbers to discuss this and make some choices. Regards, Bart
