Hi Curtis, There is no performance difference, as soon as in the first case for each class separated cluster will be created. So you will have the same document and documentHistory cluster.
The schema is bound to class, so in second case you will have single schema definition for document and for documentHistory. So the first way allow to define properties and build indexes separately for each ones. Best regards, Artem Orobets *Orient Technologies the Company behind OrientDB* 2014-04-13 21:25 GMT+03:00 Curtis Ruck <[email protected]>: > I'm trying to investigate OrientDB for a particular use case. One of the > gaps I'm tracking is being able to retain a document version history. > > Looking at the Hook API, it looks like this would make implementing > automatic versioning trivial, but not sure on the best way to go about it. > I see a few options, one is have two classes (Document and > DocumentHistory), this would allow explicitly querying the DocumentHistory > class. Another option I see is to have the Document class have two > clusters, the default "document" cluster and a "documenthistory" cluster. > This would allow explicit querying of current documents or historical > documents, but without affecting the object model. > > Has anyone implemented versioning inside OrientDB before? Do the above > suggestions make sense within the realm of OrientDB? > > -- > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "OrientDB" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OrientDB" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
