Adding to that below are few features I think any new store would have
to support

1. Sorted primary key access - For now required to find children of
any parent path
2. secondary indexes apart from _id field
3. compare-and-set (CAS) operations for sub fields

Chetan Mehrotra


On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 1:59 PM, Marcel Reutegger <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Juanjo,
>
> I don't know Cassandra that well, but I'd say this is feasible. Though, you
> would probably not implement a NodeStore but a backend for the
> DocumentNodeStore. That is, you need to implement a DocumentStore [0]. There
> are currently implementations for MongoDB [1] and RDB [2].
>
> Consistency is indeed important and Oak requires rater strict guarantees.
>
> Regards
>  Marcel
>
> [0]
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jackrabbit/oak/tags/jackrabbit-oak-1.6.0/oak-core/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/plugins/document/DocumentStore.java
> [1]
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jackrabbit/oak/tags/jackrabbit-oak-1.6.0/oak-core/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/plugins/document/mongo/MongoDocumentStore.java
> [2]
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jackrabbit/oak/tags/jackrabbit-oak-1.6.0/oak-core/src/main/java/org/apache/jackrabbit/oak/plugins/document/rdb/RDBDocumentStore.java
>
>
> On 28/03/17 19:34, Juan José Vázquez Delgado wrote:
>>
>> Hello guys, I'm currently assessing Oak as an alternative for content
>> management on my cloud product. However, I already have a Cassandra
>> cluster
>> as the main persistence technology and to go additionally with Mongo would
>> turn out in more complexity in terms of manteinance and support.
>>
>> So, have you ever consider Cassandra as an alternative to Mongo for node
>> storing?. I'd be willing to tackle the implementation of such a plugin but
>> I'd like to know if you find any drawbacks in advance. Perhaps you've
>> already tried it and stumbled across with blocking issues. For instance,
>> I'd be concern with Cassandra's eventual consistency.
>>
>> Thanks in adance for considering this.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Juanjo
>>
>

Reply via email to