OK. so XPath and SQL are deprecated but fast, SQL2 is current but slow (and has rather clumsy syntax, for my taste, compared to XPath).
This raises a couple of questions: 1) On the implementation side: For a "production-ready implementation of JCR 2.0" (quoted from Jackrabbit homepage), I would expect production-ready performance. Meanwhile I've found similar and more detailed observations from other users (http://jackrabbit.510166.n4.nabble.com/Performance-of-SQL-2-versus-XPATH-td1590422.html). I think it's ok for a reference implementation to be functionally correct but not optimized, but production-ready is another story... It would be fair at least to add some words of warning on the relevant wiki page (http://wiki.apache.org/jackrabbit/Search). 2) On the specification side: Why on earth was XPath deprecated? Even when the SQL2 implementation gets improved, the syntax remains cumbersome. (I realize this is a JCR and not a Jackrabbit question....) 3) Is it safe to implement a new application with Jackrabbit 2.x and XPath query syntax? Will Jackrabbit continue to support XPath in all 2.x releases? Best regards, Harald -- View this message in context: http://jackrabbit.510166.n4.nabble.com/How-to-avoid-sequential-scans-in-queries-tp2996800p2996958.html Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
