Adam Murdoch wrote: > On Wed, 26 Feb 2003 02:17 am, Hanasaki JiJi wrote: >> Any comparisons on VFS vs JNDI? seems very similar to me. > > They are very similar. JNDI is a little more general: a namespace of > Objects. VFS is a little more specific: a hierarchy of files.
The namespace of Objects is just 1/2 of JNDI ( the Context ). The other half is objects with attributes (DirContext)- that maps very well with files. As I mentioned in my previous post - there are few JNDI-based VFS impl. already ( from the sample filesystem JNDI provider to the more featured and optimized one in tomcat ) > etc). VFS adds things that don't make sense under JNDI's more general > model (get content as a stream, content signing, copy a tree, converting > to/from java.io.File, etc), and does things in a way that reflects how > files get used (as opposed to how generic namespaces of Objects get used). Get content as stream is certainly part of JNDI. There is also a pretty sophisticated system for conversion. The higher level utils should be separated ( copy a tree, or more special operations on the content ). JNDI also have a reasonably good policy-based security, federation ( nice if you work with multiple domains with different naming conventions ). The real issue is stable, well known API - versus some extra complexity due to the fact that it's more generic and optimizable. Of course, stability has 2 sides - it's good because its frozen, well known and tested - but bad because you can't change it. Costin --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
