On 2012-01-20 16:09, Thomas Mueller wrote:
Hi,
The current Jackrabbit implementation uses orderable child nodes by
default, meaning nodes are returned in the same order as they are
created. As an example, if I create the nodes /test/c, then /test/b, and
then /test/a, and then read the node list, I will get them back in that
same order. I'm wondering if this is really required (at all, and to be
the default behavior). Specially if there are a lot of child nodes.
Instead of using the insertion order, I propose to sort the child node
list alphabetically: /test/a, /test/b, /test/c - no matter in what order
the nodes where created. This will allow an efficient lookup (using
binary search), and for large child node lists (more than one thousand
child nodes per node) modifications would be about twice as fast as
using insertion order (plus it would need less disk space).
Would it be a problem if Jackrabbit 3 sorts child nodes by name (always,
or at least by default)?
...
Spec-wise the returned ordering shouldn't matter unless the node type
indicates that the child nodes are indeed ordered.
If we suspect that there's code out there making other assumptions, we
may want to change that in an earlier jackrabbit release to find out for
sure :-)
