[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCR-3534?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13653672#comment-13653672
 ] 

angela commented on JCR-3534:
-----------------------------

> probably I misunderstood but I thought that was ok for the moment as long as 
> we also can find a better solution for Oak, 
> which I think would have to deal with the same topic of shared resources 
> probably on a dedicated issue.

no, you got that right... i don't want to block the cq release if there is no 
other solution right now. but i would like us to discuss 
already today if there was really no other way and how we are going to address 
this in OAK before we ship that feature.
therefore i was somehow waiting for a confirmation that my concern has been 
noticed.

if we end up with releasing it with that entry in the repository.xml, i would 
like to see us having at least a FIXME comment 
associated with the repository.xml as this is not secure at all.... currently 
it states "a very well kept secret"... that's sort of
a joke given the fact that the repository.xml is almost accessible to everyone 
:-)
                
> 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-3534.4.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

Reply via email to