Am 30.05.15 um 03:17 schrieb Alexander Klimetschek: > On 28.05.2015, at 23:08, Carsten Ziegeler <[email protected]> wrote: >> I agree with this, however users of the resource api do not know which >> provider is serving the resources. That's the hole point of an abstraction. > > And this is a typical case where abstraction fails: performance. Which is > extremely important for queries. > Well, this is a broad statement and neither true nor wrong.
Look at the use cases in Sling where we use a query, e.g. the job handling. Replacing the current approach of generating a very long string for the JCR query with a more modern api does not change anything with respect to the query; but it provides the abstraction. The execution of the query is still as fast or slow as before. The same is true for most of the other technical queries we have in Sling. A good abstraction provides code to run on different providers. Today, we have abstracted nearly everything - with the only exception being a query. Having a 80% abstraction is more or less as good as not having an abstraction - which means, it's bad. I don't understand why someone is opposed to complete the abstraction. We are trying to reach this goal for a very long time now. Carsten -- Carsten Ziegeler Adobe Research Switzerland [email protected]
