[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-3534?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13651020#comment-13651020
]
Alexander Klimetschek commented on JCR-3534:
--------------------------------------------
I think on the API level we want a single string (token) - the repository
implementation generates and also handles it, all with a minimum of API
additions.
> otherwise it seems to me this is not "that" high level to justify its
> belonging to jackrabbit-api
IMO there is no gray area - either we say it's an API feature or it's not a
feature at all.
(BTW, to me jackrabbit-jcr-commons is a big chunk of utilities and it's already
suboptimal that both repository implementation and jcr client code depend on
it).
> that's basically for compatibility with existing code where you may now
> receive such an object and you wouldn't expect that to return null.
There is no way that you can "accidentally" get the BinaryReferenceMessage. The
repository would never return it (via getProperty() etc.), the only way it can
exist is between an API client instantiating it itself and passing it to
ValueFactory.createValue(Binary).
But maybe this is an indication that this Binary trick is too fuzzy from an API
design standpoint...
Some others should share their opinions.
> Efficient copying of binaries across repositories with the same data store
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: JCR-3534
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-3534
> Project: Jackrabbit Content Repository
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: jackrabbit-api, jackrabbit-core
> Affects Versions: 2.6
> Reporter: Felix Meschberger
> Assignee: Tommaso Teofili
> Attachments: JCR-3534.2.patch, JCR-3534.3.patch, JCR-3534.patch,
> JCR-3534.patch
>
>
> we have a couple of use cases, where we would like to leverage the global
> data store to prevent sending around and copying around large binary data
> unnecessarily: We have two separate Jackrabbit instances configured to use
> the same DataStore (for the sake of this discussion assume we have the
> problems of concurrent access and garbage collection under control). When
> sending content from one instance to the other instance we don't want to send
> potentially large binary data (e.g. video files) if not needed.
> The idea is for the sender to just send the content identity from
> JackrabbitValue.getContentIdentity(). The receiver would then check whether
> the such content already exists and would reuse if so:
> String ci = contentIdentity_from_sender;
> try {
> Value v = session.getValueByContentIdentity(ci);
> Property p = targetNode.setProperty(propName, v);
> } catch (ItemNotFoundException ie) {
> // unknown or invalid content Identity
> } catch (RepositoryException re) {
> // some other exception
> }
> Thus the proposed JackrabbitSession.getValueByContentIdentity(String) method
> would allow for round tripping the JackrabbitValue.getContentIdentity()
> preventing superfluous binary data copying and moving.
> See also the dev@ thread
> http://jackrabbit.markmail.org/thread/gedk5jsrp6offkhi
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
