[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCRVLT-53?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14054942#comment-14054942
]
Jukka Zitting commented on JCRVLT-53:
-------------------------------------
I think we should make ~10k orderable child nodes still work reasonably well,
as such scale is still possible also with Jackrabbit 2.x. But I wouldn't worry
too much about scaling to 100k orderable child nodes or higher. At that point
we should just tell the user to make their content unordered instead of us
bending backwards to support that use case.
> vlt: with many child nodes, NodeNameList.restoreOrder is very slow with Oak
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: JCRVLT-53
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCRVLT-53
> Project: Jackrabbit FileVault
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Thomas Mueller
> Assignee: Thomas Mueller
> Attachments: JCR-3793.patch, ReorderTest.java
>
>
> The method org.apache.jackrabbit.vault.fs.api.NodeNameList.restoreOrder
> re-orders orderable child nodes by using Node.orderBefore. This is very slow
> if there are many child nodes, specially with Oak (minutes for 10'000 nodes,
> while only about 1 second for Jackrabbit 2.x).
> [~tripod], I wonder if a possible solution is to first check whether
> re-ordering is needed? For example using:
> {noformat}
> boolean isOrdered(ArrayList<String> names, Node parent)
> throws RepositoryException {
> NodeIterator it1 = parent.getNodes();
> for (Iterator<String> it2 = names.iterator(); it2.hasNext();) {
> if (!it1.hasNext() ||
> !it1.nextNode().getName().equals(it2.next())) {
> return false;
> }
> }
> return !it1.hasNext();
> }
> {noformat}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
