Hi,
So I wouldn't dare to say "here is how I
think things should be done".
Maybe you have some ideas how to extend the JCR API to simplify using
it, or just what additional features are required.
This approach also has a draw-back: by treating Local file systems and RDB
systems the same way - same set of features, same indexing & searching API
(??), a lot of good stuff from RDBMS are wasted.
Is this now not more an implementation issue (how to do it) than a
user issue (what features are required, how the API looks like)?
These features are very useful even in querying structural data model
AFAIK, Lucene (not the RDBMS) is used to for queries (except for
direct, relative Node access and references).
My personal experience is that production-level content management systems
are more implemented on RDBMS than on local file system.
For me, the main reasons to use RDBMS are transaction support and speed.
2. When presenting architecture design to a business client (usually with
'some' knowledge of the IT
systems/products), the first question would be "is this a serious
design? why are all the data in
Blobs?". Although we as developers know that there are good reasons
for that, it may not be easily
conveyed to the client.
I know, many people think like that. On the other hand, if using Blobs
is faster, and people don't wants to access the data store directly,
why not use Blobs?
Thomas
