The return of the hierarchical model

The Return of the Hierarchical Model Jukka Zitting @ Day Software

/Agenda
Part 1: Hierarchy
Concepts -
Benefits -
Drawbacks –
Examples -
Part 2: Case Study - JCR - Jackrabbit - Sling - Lessons Learned questions and comments allowed

/Hierarchy/Concepts
Every record has a parent record
Except the root
No cyclical parent relations allowed
Referential integrity, but often no other reference types supported
A name identifies a record within its parent
The name is not necessarily unique (XML, DNS, etc.)
Path as an identifier: /path/to/record
Record hierarchy is distinct from type hierarchy
Structural flexibility, optionally limited by type constraints
A B C D E F

/Hierarchy/Benefits
Natural
Data in many domains is inherently hierarchical
Easy to understand
Self-similar
Recursive algorithms
Incremental map-reduce!
Scalable
Partitioning
Parallel processing
Efficient
Highly optimized path-based access and “joins” on the parent-child and subtree relationships

/Hierarchy/Drawbacks
Limited support for references
Graph databases solve this problem, at a cost
DAG a partial solution
Handling of flat structures
Chronological: blogs, tweets, email, log entries, etc.
Sets: wiki pages, user accounts, etc.
Often requires an artificial hierarchy, e.g. /blog/2010/06/entry-for-today
Standards are domain-specific or limited in scope
POSIX, DNS, XPath/XQuery, JCR, etc.
Difficulty of organizing things
Coming up with good names for records is hard
Hierarchy requires maintenance

/Hierarchy/Examples
File system
DNS
LDAP
XML
WebDAV
RDBMS

/Hierarchy/Examples/File System
Universally available
Two main types: files and folders
Notable extensions: /dev/* and /proc/*
Unix philosophy: Everything is a file!
Heavily optimized for specific use cases
Limited support for fine-grained data
Some systems support things like extended attributes
Built-in access controls, but usually no query support
Major limitations in distributed solutions
SAN and NAS solutions reasonably efficient but limited in scope
Truly distributed systems like HDFS applicable only for limited use cases

/Hierarchy/Examples/DNS
Globally distributed, heterogenous, eventually consistent
In production since 1983!
Standardized query and update protocols
Domain-specific, highly optimized for scalability
Multiple records can have the same name
Fine-grained record types: A, NS, MX, TXT, AAAA, etc.
Security issues, both in design and implementations
Not much impact in practice

/Hierarchy/Examples/LDAP
Protocol for accessing X.500-style directories
Record names are constructed from selected properties
dn: cn=John Doe, dc=example, dc=com
Record types defined by extensible schemas
Limited form of record references
Fairly powerful search
Though no aggregate queries or arbitrary joins
Optimized for fine-grained data that is mostly read
Replication and distributed use widely supported

/Hierarchy/Examples/XML
Data storage based on the XML DOM
Various levels of conformance
Highly buzzword compliant in the early 2000’s
Few of the XML database products are still in active use
Inefficient handling of binary data (at all granularities)
Powerful query and transformation tooling
XPath, XQuery, XSLT, etc.
Many implementations not optimized for performance
Optional type constraints with XML Schema, etc.
The result? XML extensions in SQL

/Hierarchy/Examples/WebDAV
Extends HTTP with concepts of collections and properties
Also: locking, versioning, search, etc.
Often used (only) for HTTP-based access to a file system
Also leveraged by fs-like systems like Subversion
Limited XML-based query with PROPFIND
More query power with DASL
Somewhat heavy-weight for fine-grained access
Fragmented and often incompatible implementations
File system backend as the lowest common denominator
cf. AtomPub

/Hierarchy/Examples/RDBMS
Various ways of representing hierarchies in RDBM systems
Adjacency model: Each row has a reference to the parent
Nested sets: Rows numbered in depth-first traversal order
etc.
Little structural flexibility
Expensive parent-child or subtree joins
Vendor-specific extensions to address this problem
Two words: Impedance mismatch

/Hierarchy/Summary
Data storage/management using an explicit tree hierarchy
Natural mapping, nice non-functional characteristics
Limited functionality, lack of generic standards
Widely used, but in domain-specific ways
Extremely efficient/scalable for certain data models
How about a generic, feature-rich hierarchical database?

/Case/JCR
Content Repository for Java Technology API (JCR)
JCR 1.0 out in 2005, specified in JSR 170
JCR 2.0 out in 2009, specified in JSR 283
Work on JCR 2.1 starting
A content repository is a hierarchical content store
with full text search, observation, versioning, transactions, etc.
JCR 2.0 adds retention, type management, join queries, etc.
Designed for both structured and unstructured content
handling of both finely and coarsely grained data
Application platform more than an integration API

/Case/Jackrabbit
Reference implementation of both JCR 1.0 and 2.0
Primary focus on feature-completeness
Apache incubator since 2004, TLP since 2006
Internal storage through an abstracted key-value API
Tree model implemented on top of that
Lucene search index maintained separately
Separate journal for cluster deployments
Advanced WebDAV support
Jackrabbit 3: Focus on scalability, modularity

/Case/Sling
Web framework based on the JCR content model
Apache incubator since 2007, TLP since 2009
Intuitive URL mapping
Path selects the underlying content resource
Optional selectors and extensions determine representation
JSON and POST servlets with Javascript support
OSGi for server-side modularity
Everything is content

/Case/Lessons Learned
Content-driven development
Data first, structure later
Distribute for redundancy
Modern hardware goes a long way for scalability/performance
For small/medium deployments, distribution is more important for fault-tolerance especially in cloud environments
Relationships are important
JCR 2.0 is a DAG, plus references for expressing full graphs
Referential integrity not so important
Notable data sets are flat
Don’t forget tool support for ad-hoc tasks!

/Questions?
http://jackrabbit.apache.org/
http://sling.apache.org/
http://www.day.com/jsr283

http://www.paolomottadelli.com	495
http://dev.day.com	98
http://www.slideshare.net	64
http://translate.googleusercontent.com	15
http://adiefatlady.posterous.com	6
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com	3
http://localhost	3
http://www.freshnews.de	1

The return of the hierarchical model

by Jukka Zitting on Jun 07, 2010

Accessibility

Categories

Tags

Upload Details

Usage Rights

8 Embeds 685

Statistics

The return of the hierarchical model — Presentation Transcript