rave-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jasha Joachimsthal <ja...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Reintegration of MongoDB Branch
Date Sun, 06 Jan 2013 21:07:17 GMT
On 6 January 2013 21:44, Matt Franklin <m.ben.franklin@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 2:27 PM, Chris Geer <chris@cxtsoftware.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 11:49 AM, Matt Franklin <m.ben.franklin@gmail.com
> >wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Matt Franklin
> >> <m.ben.franklin@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > The MongoDb branch is about ready to be re-integrated into trunk.  I
> >> > am currently going through and fixing merge conflicts caused by the
> >> > model-interface split.  Currently, the only changes to the current
> >> > working code are some application context improvements and additional
> >> > configuration attributes.  In order to ensure that the jpa & mongo
> >> > modules were swappable, I tried to isolate the changes as much as
> >> > possible.  Because of this, I think the risk to trunk is pretty low.
> >> >
> >> > Assuming no objections, I will merge it back to trunk before the end
> of
> >> Monday.
> >>
> >> Of course, I forgot Monday was New Year's eve.  I have completed all
> >> of the work now and committed the branch back to trunk.
> >>
> >> The vast majority of changes are isolated into the rave-mongodb
> >> project.  I did add new build profiles for rave-portal and rave-portal
> >> resources so that the entire rave-project can be built with MongoDB as
> >> the default persistence provider.  However, the default profile is JPA
> >> and the rave-portal & rave-portal-resources releases will still be set
> >> for JPA persistence.
> >>
> >> I tested a clean build of the JPA version of rave and saw no issues
> >> with the merged code.
> >>
> >
> > Matt, quick question for you. I noticed that the group table (collection)
> > doesn't just contain a list of user IDs but instead contains complete
> user
> > objects. What happens if the user object stored in the group and the user
> > object stored in the users table get out of sync? Can that be simplified
> to
> > just store the IDs?
>
> Yes, it should be.  I will create a JIRA ticket.
>
> >
> > Have you done any tests using multiple providers for different entities?
> > For example using Mongo for Users but JPA for Pages? The model split
> should
> > allow that but I don't know if the providers will allow for that.
>
> No, but doing this and documenting is important.
>

We also should find a more elegant solution than building multiple modules
with the mongodb profile to use MongoDb, but I haven't found a clean
solution yet.


> >
> > Can't wait to try this out!
> >
> > Chris
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message