On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 3:43 PM, Carsten Ziegeler <[email protected]> wrote: > why can't do Oak the right thing?
Compatibility constraints :). Had this discussion earlier also but given compatibility constraints its not possible to change the defaults. If a nodetype says its referenceable/orderable once then its not possible to change the semantics later as it would break down those code which rely on that semantic. However user of the api can decide to use a different nodetype as per his requirement. So its more like the api user deciding to switch a more performant nodetype with the understanding around what that nodetype guarantees (think of using ArrayList instead of LinkedList depending on usage pattern). That being said then same argument can be applied to change being done in Sling level where for same POST request now results in different nodetypes being used. If that is a big concern then we can make use of this new nodetype based on some request param. So a user would have to specify that nodetype hint if he wants to use the oak:Resource nodetype? I am just aiming for a solution here which enables a user to use a more optimum nodetype and get best performance out of underlying repository. Chetan Mehrotra [1] http://markmail.org/thread/uj2ht4jwdrck7eja
