Yeah, you know.. I read that entry, and I certainly am in no position to comment on the cost of SNS in the repository.
What I can say, is that if you are going to model real world data, and by data, I don't mean at the document level, but at a level of some detail, then lists, arrays of items of the same type, are rampant and that is a data structure that has to be accommodated. It's easy to say in the abstract, to use some identifying title as the name of your node, as was done in the blog example, but... look at my example. There's no "name" for a line item, that you can use like you would a blog posting. Line items have limited data and they have exactly the same structure, and they have data that's of the same types. So my question is, am I modeling at the wrong level of abstraction? Should I have one node that describes the whole order? If so how do I handle line items in that entry? If the solution isn't SNS then what is it? Tony On Jul 23, 2010, at 4:12 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 9:44 PM, Justin Edelson <[email protected]> > wrote: >> On 7/22/10 3:17 PM, Tony Giaccone wrote: >>> ...The problem I'm having is that I don't want to give each line item a >>> unique name. >>> Does a node have to have a unique name?... >> Theoretically, no, each node does not need a unique name if you use same >> name siblings.... > > Note that SNS are a bad idea for a variety of reasons, see rule #4 at > http://wiki.apache.org/jackrabbit/DavidsModel > > -Bertrand
