Hi Alex, 2012/11/22 Alexander Klimetschek <[email protected]>
> > Why does Jackrabbit/Oak not map JCR hierarchies directly to the filesystem? > > I worked with the proprietary content "repository" of Day's Communique 3 (the contentbus), which stored pages directly on the filesystem. Besides the things Jukka pointed out I would like to add: * ACLs: I think it's very hard to map the JCR ACL semantic to filesystem ACLs (I don't want to discuss here the differences between Windows and *nix systems regarding access rights, ACLs, RBAC and so on ... true multiplattform is then a real real hard job). Besides this fact, I don't think it's a good idea of reuse the user management of your OS and map system users to JCR users. So in any case you have to do the ACL and usermanagement stuff on a repository level yourself. * Dealing with millions or even billions of small files is still a hard job for a file system, although they improved a lot in the last 10 years. * Operation people will complain if you need to store these millions of files on their backup systems, because they need to keep track of every single file. So from a operational point of view there are a lot of arguments against a "every node is file" approach. -- Cheers, Jörg Hoh, http://cqdump.wordpress.com
