Use of diferent or same schemaObjectPrefixes

[amsmota]

I notice that if I have different schemaObjectPrefix for

A) Repository/FileSystem -> 1 table
B) Repository/Workspace/FileSystem -> 1 table
C) Repository/Workspace/PersistenceManager -> 4 tables
D) Repository/Versioning/FileSystem -> 1 table
E) Repository/Versioning/PersistenceManager -> 4 tables

A, B, D -> *fsentry
C, E -> *binval, *node, *prop, *refs

I end up with 11 tables. If I use a common schemaObjectPrefix (or if I use the schemaObjectPrefix  to configure my schema, see here) I only get 5 tables.

Now what I want top know is what was the rationale behind the implementation of this (optionally) different schemaObjectPrefix's. Is just a question of housekeeping, to properly identify the different types of repository, to prevent the tables getting to big? Or is there a more "profound" reason?

I need to know this to go ahead with the use of schemaObjectPrefix to define my database schema or not.

Thanks all.

[Stefan Guggisberg-2]

On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 11:56 AM, amsmota <amsmota@...> wrote:

>
>  I notice that if I have different schemaObjectPrefix for
>
>  A) Repository/FileSystem -> 1 table
>  B) Repository/Workspace/FileSystem -> 1 table
>  C) Repository/Workspace/PersistenceManager -> 4 tables
>  D) Repository/Versioning/FileSystem -> 1 table
>  E) Repository/Versioning/PersistenceManager -> 4 tables
>
>  A, B, D -> *fsentry
>  C, E -> *binval, *node, *prop, *refs
>
>  I end up with 11 tables. If I use a common schemaObjectPrefix (or if I use
>  the schemaObjectPrefix  to configure my schema, see
>  http://www.nabble.com/Using-diferent-database-schemas-td16993168.html here )
>  I only get 5 tables.
>
>  Now what I want top know is what was the rationale behind the implementation
>  of this (optionally) different schemaObjectPrefix's. Is just a question of
>  housekeeping, to properly identify the different types of repository, to
>  prevent the tables getting to big? Or is there a more "profound" reason?

every DatabaseFileSystem and DatabasePersistenceManager instance that uses
a shared db absolutely *needs* to specify a unique schemaObjectPrefix value.
failing to do so will most probably lead to data corruption.

an example:

api-level locks are currently persisted in the workspace FileSystem. multiple
wokspaces using identical schemaObjectPefix values could therefore potentially
overwrite/corrupt each others locks files.

cheers
stefan

>
>  I need to know this to go ahead with the use of schemaObjectPrefix to define
>  my database schema or not.
>
>  Thanks all.
>
>
>
>
>  --
>  View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Use-of-diferent-or-same-schemaObjectPrefixes-tp17079492p17079492.html
>  Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>

[amsmota]

Ok, different schemaObjectPrefix it is.

Do I have to be aware of other possible clashes besides DatabaseFileSystem / DatabasePersistenceManager ?

Cheers.

Stefan Guggisberg-2 wrote:

every DatabaseFileSystem and DatabasePersistenceManager instance that uses
a shared db absolutely *needs* to specify a unique schemaObjectPrefix value.
failing to do so will most probably lead to data corruption.

[amsmota]

The reason I'm asking this is because I see that exists 4 sets of .ddl in the application, and I changed only 2, corresponding to the DatabaseFileSystem / DatabasePersistenceManager. What are this other 2 for?

org.apache.jackrabbit.core.journal
org.apache.jackrabbit.core.persistence.bundle

amsmota wrote:

Do I have to be aware of other possible clashes besides DatabaseFileSystem / DatabasePersistenceManager ?

[Stefan Guggisberg-2]

On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 6:33 PM, amsmota <amsmota@...> wrote:
>
> The reason I'm asking this is because I see that exists 4 sets of .ddl in the
> application, and I changed only 2, corresponding to the DatabaseFileSystem /
> DatabasePersistenceManager. What are this other 2 for?
>
> org.apache.jackrabbit.core.journal

those are used by  o.a.j.c.journal.DatabaseJournal. if you'e not using the
clustering feature you don't have to care.

> org.apache.jackrabbit.core.persistence.bundle

those are used by o.a.j.c.persistence.bundle.BundleDbPersistenceManager and
subclasses which are the (preferred) alternatives to DatabasePersistenceManager
and subclasses.

cheers
stefan

>
>
>
> amsmota wrote:
>>
>> Do I have to be aware of other possible clashes besides DatabaseFileSystem
>> / DatabasePersistenceManager ?
>>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Use-of-diferent-or-same-schemaObjectPrefixes-tp17079492p17128109.html
> Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>

[amsmota]

Hmm, actually I never looked at the BundleDbPersistenceManager, can you elaborate a little on what it does and why is preferred over DatabasePersistenceManager?

Thanks.

Stefan Guggisberg-2 wrote:

On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 6:33 PM, amsmota <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> The reason I'm asking this is because I see that exists 4 sets of .ddl in the
> application, and I changed only 2, corresponding to the DatabaseFileSystem /
> DatabasePersistenceManager. What are this other 2 for?
>
> org.apache.jackrabbit.core.journal

those are used by  o.a.j.c.journal.DatabaseJournal. if you'e not using the
clustering feature you don't have to care.

> org.apache.jackrabbit.core.persistence.bundle

those are used by o.a.j.c.persistence.bundle.BundleDbPersistenceManager and
subclasses which are the (preferred) alternatives to DatabasePersistenceManager
and subclasses.

cheers
stefan

>
>
>
> amsmota wrote:
>>
>> Do I have to be aware of other possible clashes besides DatabaseFileSystem
>> / DatabasePersistenceManager ?
>>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Use-of-diferent-or-same-schemaObjectPrefixes-tp17079492p17128109.html
> Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>

[Stefan Guggisberg-2]

On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 3:25 PM, amsmota <amsmota@...> wrote:
>
>  Hmm, actually I never looked at the BundleDbPersistenceManager, can you
>  elaborate a little on what it does and why is preferred over
>  DatabasePersistenceManager?

BundleDbPersistenceManager is the current default persistence manager.
instead of storing every node and property separately (like
SimpleDbPersistenceManager does)  it stores a 'bundle' of the node and its
properties in a single table row, thus significantly reducing
network-roundtrips.

cheers
stefan

>
>  Thanks.
>
>
>
>
>
>  Stefan Guggisberg-2 wrote:
>  >
>  > On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 6:33 PM, amsmota <amsmota@...> wrote:
>  >>
>  >> The reason I'm asking this is because I see that exists 4 sets of .ddl in
>  >> the
>  >> application, and I changed only 2, corresponding to the
>  >> DatabaseFileSystem /
>  >> DatabasePersistenceManager. What are this other 2 for?
>  >>
>  >> org.apache.jackrabbit.core.journal
>  >
>  > those are used by  o.a.j.c.journal.DatabaseJournal. if you'e not using the
>  > clustering feature you don't have to care.
>  >
>  >> org.apache.jackrabbit.core.persistence.bundle
>  >
>  > those are used by o.a.j.c.persistence.bundle.BundleDbPersistenceManager
>  > and
>  > subclasses which are the (preferred) alternatives to
>  > DatabasePersistenceManager
>  > and subclasses.
>  >
>  > cheers
>  > stefan
>  >
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >> amsmota wrote:
>  >>>
>  >>> Do I have to be aware of other possible clashes besides
>  >>> DatabaseFileSystem
>  >>> / DatabasePersistenceManager ?
>  >>>
>  >>
>  >> --
>  >> View this message in context:
>  >> http://www.nabble.com/Use-of-diferent-or-same-schemaObjectPrefixes-tp17079492p17128109.html
>  >> Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>  >>
>  >>
>  >
>  >
>
>  --
>  View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Use-of-diferent-or-same-schemaObjectPrefixes-tp17079492p17208371.html
>
>
> Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>