<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: JCR Implementation in Alfresco Archive</title>
    <link>https://connect.hyland.com/t5/alfresco-archive/jcr-implementation/m-p/17324#M7805</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;BLOCKQUOTE class="jive-quote"&gt;Not in the short term.&amp;nbsp; But as 170 is a standard, RMI implementation layers will appear (I think JackRabbit has one) which could be hosted on top our local interface.&amp;nbsp; The only thing to consider is performance - 170 is a chatty interface, so the RMI implementation needs to be carefully map 170 interface calls to underlying RMI calls.&lt;/BLOCKQUOTE&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;I can see how performance might be an issue.&amp;nbsp; It's going to be an issue with any remote api.&amp;nbsp; Like you said, the JCR requires a lot of calls which could be rather expensive. &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;I am not really thrilled about RMI anyway. I put some RMI wrappers around a number of the JCR interfaces just to build out a toy.&amp;nbsp; I didn't want to have alfresco loaded directly below my app.&amp;nbsp; At this point I am not seeing too much of penalty.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;I will look at jackrabbit, maybe I should just reuse the work they have there.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Nov 2005 19:44:11 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>rdanner</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2005-11-25T19:44:11Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>JCR Implementation</title>
      <link>https://connect.hyland.com/t5/alfresco-archive/jcr-implementation/m-p/17322#M7803</link>
      <description>Is there any plan to expose the Alfresco impl behind RMI?I guess one could argue that web service interfaces defeat the purpose.&amp;nbsp; RMI interfaces is more natural to java users. anywho… just wondering.</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Nov 2005 03:23:49 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://connect.hyland.com/t5/alfresco-archive/jcr-implementation/m-p/17322#M7803</guid>
      <dc:creator>rdanner</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2005-11-14T03:23:49Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: JCR Implementation</title>
      <link>https://connect.hyland.com/t5/alfresco-archive/jcr-implementation/m-p/17323#M7804</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Not in the short term.&amp;nbsp; But as 170 is a standard, RMI implementation layers will appear (I think JackRabbit has one) which could be hosted on top our local interface.&amp;nbsp; The only thing to consider is performance - 170 is a chatty interface, so the RMI implementation needs to be carefully map 170 interface calls to underlying RMI calls.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Nov 2005 17:29:03 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://connect.hyland.com/t5/alfresco-archive/jcr-implementation/m-p/17323#M7804</guid>
      <dc:creator>davidc</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2005-11-24T17:29:03Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: JCR Implementation</title>
      <link>https://connect.hyland.com/t5/alfresco-archive/jcr-implementation/m-p/17324#M7805</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;BLOCKQUOTE class="jive-quote"&gt;Not in the short term.&amp;nbsp; But as 170 is a standard, RMI implementation layers will appear (I think JackRabbit has one) which could be hosted on top our local interface.&amp;nbsp; The only thing to consider is performance - 170 is a chatty interface, so the RMI implementation needs to be carefully map 170 interface calls to underlying RMI calls.&lt;/BLOCKQUOTE&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;I can see how performance might be an issue.&amp;nbsp; It's going to be an issue with any remote api.&amp;nbsp; Like you said, the JCR requires a lot of calls which could be rather expensive. &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;I am not really thrilled about RMI anyway. I put some RMI wrappers around a number of the JCR interfaces just to build out a toy.&amp;nbsp; I didn't want to have alfresco loaded directly below my app.&amp;nbsp; At this point I am not seeing too much of penalty.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;I will look at jackrabbit, maybe I should just reuse the work they have there.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Nov 2005 19:44:11 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://connect.hyland.com/t5/alfresco-archive/jcr-implementation/m-p/17324#M7805</guid>
      <dc:creator>rdanner</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2005-11-25T19:44:11Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

