cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Vadim Gritsenko <va...@reverycodes.com>
Subject Re: FilesystemStore broken???
Date Wed, 20 Oct 2004 10:49:36 GMT
Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> One addition: doing this would also mean that the cache doesn't
> depend on excalibur store anymore... 

But:
  * Cache is "This component is responsible for storing and
    retrieving cached responses.", to quote the Javadoc. Store,
    OTOH, can be used by any component to store any data.

  * Cache accepts only CachedResponse. It won't be suitable for
    majority of components.

  * Cache does not have mechanism reacting on low memory (Janitor).

  * Cache has no TRANSIENT / PERSISTENT separation.


We only recently had store clean up (thanks Sylvain) and even not all components 
yet migrated to using stores instead of static HashMaps. I feel it's more 
important to focus on components implementations clean up but not on yet another 
store mechanism re-write.

Vadim


>>The cache is an own component (called Cache) which has 
>>currently one default implementation that uses a Store 
>>(component). Now I think for such use cases a different Cache 
>>implementation is better. This implementation could directly 
>>"cache" the data without going via a store.
>>
>>Carsten 

Mime
View raw message