Hi, On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 11:37 PM, Tobias Bocanegra <[email protected]> wrote: > so for large childnode lists, a stable but uncontrollable order > would be ok, although violating the spec?
I wouldn't violate the spec for this. If you have an orderable node (like nt:unstructured), then the repository should keep track of the order of child nodes regardless of how many they are. IMHO it's OK for the repository *not* to scale up or perform well if someone dumps a million child nodes to an orderable parent. However, it would be great if we could implement efficient storage for nodes with lots (i.e. millions) of unorderable children. In such a case I'd say we can expect the client to explicitly use a parent node with a custom node type that doesn't require orderability. I wouldn't even promise a stable iteration order for such cases. The repository should be free to for example reorder the internal data structure based on frequent access patterns. BR, Jukka Zitting
