Hi Neil, 1. I don't know about SECUREFILE - if it is a type to store large binary it should be ok... 2. This is ok, cause the additional fields will be only filled by the db trigger and are not used by jackrabbit. 3. This is also ok. Primary keys are unique index constraints in Oracle (but you can only have one at a table).
Kindly regards, Robert -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Neil [mailto:[email protected]] Gesendet: Samstag, 12. Februar 2011 19:52 An: [email protected] Betreff: Are DBA Changes to the Jackrabbit Tables Ok? Hello all, The dba for my company wants to make some changes to the tables that were created in Oracle for my Jackrabbit app. I tried to explain to him that JCR is not relational and that the Table creation was handled by the repository on startup and when accessing the workspace the first time. Being a DBA he couldn't let it go, so he made the following changes and I would like to get some feedback on the dangers if any these changes could pose. For the {$workspaceName}_BUNDLE and {$workspaceName}_BINVAL tables: 1. Changed the LOB storage to SECUREFILE type 2. Added an INSERT_DATE and LAST_MODIFIED fields that are update by before Insert and Update triggers. 3. Removed Unique Index constraint and created Primary Key on NODE_ID/BINVAL_ID For the DATASTORE table: 1. Changed LOB storage to SECUREFILE type. Thanks, Neil -- View this message in context: http://jackrabbit.510166.n4.nabble.com/Are-DBA-Changes-to-the-Jackrabbit-Tables-Ok-tp3303004p3303004.html Sent from the Jackrabbit - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
