On 8/7/07, Phillip Rhodes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks for the suggestion.
>
> I did just now give the bundle Persistence manager a shot and it did not 
> resolve my sql query per node problem.
>
> Thanks again!
>

Is this related to your initial N+1 queries problem? Are you saying
the the bundle PMs are behaving the same?

thanks,
./alex
--
.w( the_mindstorm )p.

> Phillip
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "sbarriba" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [email protected]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 7, 2007 12:09:46 PM (GMT-0500) America/New_York
> Subject: RE: ObjectPersistenceManager vs SimpleDbPersistenceManager
>
> Hi Phillip,
> Have you tried the new 
> org.apache.jackrabbit.core.persistence.bundle.*PersistenceManagers?
> e.g. org.apache.jackrabbit.core.persistence.bundle.MySqlPersistenceManager
> Regards,
> Shaun.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Phillip Rhodes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 07 August 2007 16:51
> To: users
> Subject: ObjectPersistenceManager vs SimpleDbPersistenceManager
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> I did some debugging for my performance problems with 
> SimpleDbPersistenceManager.
> I ran SimpleDbPersistenceManager with jdbclogger and found that Jackrabbit 
> will issue 2+ sql queries for each node as I iterator through the 
> NodeIterator.  This does not scale well for me.
>
> I am considering switching my workspace to use the ObjectPersistenceManager . 
>  I understand it is not reliable as the SimpleDbPersistenceManager, but since 
> I won't be issuing 400+ database queries, I hope the performance for my 
> application will improve.
>
> Am I risking the entire repository becoming corrupt, or just a few nodes 
> becoming corrupt?  I don't mind a few nodes becoming corrupt, but if the 
> entire repo can become corrupt if the repository is killed, I would 
> appreciate knowing this!
>
>
>
>
> Thank you as always.
> Phillip
>
>
>
>

Reply via email to