On Fri, 21 Jun 2002, Mark J. Stang wrote: > All we are going to do is to provide a way to "link" in the > Xindice code into anyones application without having to have > any network traffic. It will be an alternate means of access. > Currently, there are two ways to access data. One is via > CORBA, the other is through RPC. Using the CORBA method > you can start Xindice up as a seperate process or as part of your > own application. However, it still uses CORBA to access the > data. This means that is has to marshall and unmarshall to the > server and then the same on the way back. Even if it is running > inside your JVM. What the "embedded" project is going to do > is to provide an implementation of the XML:DB API. The API > will be the same as the CORBA version and I think the RPC > version. The only difference will be that it will directly access > the data without any middleware. So, it will just be a different > import to use the networked vs the non-networked version. > > Does anyone disagree or see a problem here? We are just about > ready to start...
Not really a problem but a question: I'm in the process of writing a perl XML:DB front end to Xindice and eXist (also on sourceforge :-). In both cases I can only access the db over XML-RPC, which as you point out already involves large amounts of marshalling and unmarshalling (and in my case even more - to get a ResourceSet from the XML-RPC output I have to parse the output into a DOM tree to break it up into separate Resources, and to do XUpdates on a Collection I'm actually having to fetch each document over XML-RPC, apply the XUpdate, and store it again...). It would be so much faster if I could just access the db over a socket (or failing that if the XML-RPC interface, or any other interface, provided more transparent access to the internal XML:DB API). So the questions: 1. would there be any plans in your project for fast language-independent access? My ideal would be if I could treat the DB as a resource without caring what language it was written in, like I can with relational dbs, but without loosing huge amounts of efficiency in the process. 2. Or if the project just allows people to embed Xindice within a Java application more efficiently, could this be a simple wrapper application to allow external access to the XML:DB API through a socket? Is anyone planning to do this? Hope the questions make sense... I'm a bit new to all this area... Thanks Graham > > thanks, > > Mark > > Kurt Ward wrote: > > > I'm going to disappear for a couple of weeks while I move across the > > country. > > I am looking forward to continuing the development of the server, but I'm > > not sure > > what is/needs/should/could/have-to be worked on at this point. Most of the > > basic > > XML-RPC API is in CVS along with the unit tests. Not sure if anyone has > > looked > > at it yet, but it seems to be getting there. Some of the changes I have > > made may require > > a few modifications to James Bates XML:DB code in the CVS scratchpad (James, > > if you are still around it would be with GetDocumentCount() and > > GetCollectionCount() due to XML-RPC types). I'm also a little confused with > > all of the messages about working on a stand-alone server. Don't get me > > wrong, I think this a GREAT idea, but to me it leaves the other pieces > > hanging a bit. Is the server to become stand-alone with separate access > > layers? Or is that later down the road than a 1.1 release? > > Kimbro/Tom/James: Let me know what you would like me to spend time on once > > I get up and running, I'll be itching to get at the keyboard. > > > > Kurt > > -- > Mark J Stang > Software Architect > Cybershop Systems > >
