Hi, On 2/7/07, anton_slutsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So what do you guys think of my implementation? I really hate to deploy my apps with customized code. I'd rather have it out there with an out-of-the-box jackrabbit.
Looks cool, though I have some concerns. My main concern is about using search to find the node type references. Normally this shouldn't be a problem, but since the search index is a separate copy of the persisted content there is a chance of coherence issues. More notably the search engine is pluggable and in some cases it has been disabled alltogether. Using the actual item state and persistence managers to look for references would IMHO be safer, though as of now there are no access paths outside the search index that would perform reasonably. Another concern is concurrency. How can we make sure that there are no concurrent modifications going on that might introduce new references to the node type in question? I think your patch is a good starting point but we still need work to sort out all the relevant details. You may want to attach your patch to JCR-322 or file it as a separate improvement request. I'd also suggest that you take this thread to the developer mailing list. BR, Jukka Zitting
