30 Apr
2007
30 Apr
'07
8:01 a.m.
Hi,
thanks for replying. My problem with the database had nothing to do with oracle. My test
machine is behind a firewall and so the app server had no way to access the hibernate dtd.
I loaded it down and put it on a local machine. Now it's running.
Regards
György Magoss
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Vincent Massol [mailto:vincent@massol.net]
Gesendet: Freitag, 27. April 2007 14:57
An: xwiki-users(a)objectweb.org
Betreff: Re: [xwiki-users] problems with jackrabbit
On Apr 27, 2007, at 1:02 PM, gyoergy.magoss(a)bhf-bank.com wrote:
Hi,
we are looking for a java based wiki. XWIKI seems to fulfill most
of our requirements. The only drawback seems, that we are bound to
using ORACLE as the database. Since this does not worked I tried a
file based approach using jackrabbit.
Oracle is supported since XWiki 1.0 RC1. See http://www.xwiki.org/
xwiki/bin/view/AdminGuide/InstallationOracle
The installation (ond tomcat 5.5.23) was no problem.
When I go to
the man page the system starts to create the file repository but
suddenly falls over with the Exception shown at the bottom of this
message.
I checked the archives but couldn't find a hint as to how to solve
this problem.
The classes Field and NodeIndexer that seem to cause the problems
are definitely loaded from the libraries deployed in the lib
directory of XWIKI (checked with Class.forName
(sClassName).getProtectionDomain().getCodeSource().getLocation
().toString() for each class in a jsp I deployed into the XWIKI-
application. Has anyone an idea what the reason for this problem is
and/or how to solve it? Using MySQL or any other database than
ORACLE is a no go.
[snip]
I don't think JCR support is working as of now. We're going to focus
on it for XWiki 1.1/1.2. We have a Google Summer of Code project that
will starting working on it again at end of May. We'd like to make
JCR the main XWiki storage solution. However we still have some
issues about the capabilities of JCR, especially in the domain of
JOIN queries. In conclusion: we need it to do at least what the
current RDBMS solution does.
Thanks
-Vincent