cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Corin Moss" <>
Subject RE: FilesystemStore broken???
Date Thu, 21 Oct 2004 23:23:19 GMT


This does indeed cause problems now that true persistence is working.
Given that no space is actually recovered from the persistent store
(even when items are invalid) the disk-cache grows - even across
shutdown /startup cycles.  I guess the store janitor will need to be
modified to enable removal of expired / invalid content.


-----Original Message-----
From: Geoff Howard []
Sent: Friday, 22 October 2004 10:48 a.m.
Subject: Re: FilesystemStore broken???

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 14:57:28 -0400, Vadim Gritsenko
<> wrote:
> Pier Fumagalli wrote:
> > On 21 Oct 2004, at 04:22, Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
> >
> >> Store:
> >>   "Clean out" here writes stuff out into the persistent store,
> >>   if stuff is Serializable.
> >> Transient store:
> >>   "Clean out" here removes stuff completely, hence the
> >>   name: "transient".
> >> Persistent store:
> >>   Janitor does not touch this store at all. No "clean out"
> >>   happening at all.
> >
> > So, given that the cache is caching in the persistent store, who
> > cleans it out? The cache itself? This is getting _waay_ to frisky
> > for my taste :-(
> Cache caches into Store. Store overflows into PersistentStore when low

> on memory or on shutdown (*).
> Cache cleans up stale items on "as-detected" basis, or, if you use
> event cache pipelines, stale items removed as per external events
> (**).
> Vadim
> * Might not work with JCS / EHCache implementations
> ** Don't know much about this event stuff myself

You're right about the event-based cache validities - not much more to
say about it in this context.

Also, the unbounded nature of the persistent store (especially as it
relates to the overflow from the cache) has always worried me.  I'd much
prefer to see cached entries examined periodically and if they can be
determined to be invalid, removed.  But, in practice this apparently has
not caused noticeable problems or surely we would have heard about it?


CAUTION: This e-mail and any attachment(s) contains information
that is intended to be read only by the named recipient(s). It
may contain information that is confidential, proprietary or the
subject of legal privilege. This information is not to be used by
any other person and/or organisation. If you are not the intended
recipient, please advise us immediately and delete this e-mail
from your system. Do not use any information contained in it.

For more information on the Television New Zealand Group, visit
us online at

View raw message