I agree, examining each node manually would be safer, but, like you said, it probably wont scale performancewise.
Concurrency is an issue. I was thinking on setting a semaphore or a mutex flag on the RepositoryImpl instance, but I was sure if it's possible to have two RepositoryImpl instances working on the same physical repository. From what I've read so far, it doesnt appear that such a behavior is supported. If this can be confirmed to be a fact, the mutex solution should really do the trick. Please pardon the ignorance, but what is an improvement request, and where can I file one? :-) Thanks, Anton Jukka Zitting wrote: > > 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 > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/NodeTypeRegistry.checkForReferencesInContent%28%29-tf2882955.html#a8847994 Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
