jakarta-jcs-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From James Taylor <jtay...@4lane.com>
Subject RE: JCS Maturity ... some comments ...
Date Thu, 05 Dec 2002 12:51:17 GMT
On Thu, 2002-12-05 at 03:03, Joe Azure wrote:
> All,
> 
> I just wanted to quickly add my 2 cents worth on JCS and its maturity.....
> 
> 1) I have been using JCS for single node caches for a few months and have
> had no issues really to speak of.  The LRUMemoryCache without memory
> shrinking, with size limits, and using both eternal and timeout objects...
> to be more precise.
> 
> 2) I initially implemented our multi-node caching system using the default
> JCS implementation of TCP-based lateral caching, but a few things kept us
> from going to production with it as is:
> 
> 	- The need for cached objects to be Serializable (actually an issue for us
> for the basic CacheElements in general)
> 	- I wanted the lateral cache to do nothing more than send notifications to
> other nodes when an element, or a cache should be invalidated.
> 	- When using more than 2 nodes, the connection recovery mechanism did not
> properly reconnect all the nodes together when they were finally all
> available.

Serializable question is a tough call. I like the idea of allowing non
serializable for an distribute-invalidate only cache, but it may not be
right for JCS given previous community response...

> 3) I have gone ahead and modified JCS for our system, and resolved the three
> issues from 2).  I know I saw some old discussions regarding Serializable
> objects only, allowed in the Caches and couldn't find a definitive decision,
> but my existing implementation works fine for us.  Without opening a can of
> old worms, I would be interested in finding out the concensus on this.

Any patches improving the TCP lateral cache would be great.

> 4) My implementation of the LateralTCPCache works pretty well now.  I added
> a NotifyMode property, that when true will make the Lateral Cache never try
> to send a Cached object over the wire.  I think there is value in this kind
> of remote cache clustering...any comments.
> 
> Thanks for the work that has gone into JCS so far.  I have not done all the
> reading necessary to figure out what it takes to contribute code to the
> project, so I haven't posted any of these changes...is it worthwhile for me
> to do this?

Yes, I can apply patches. cvs diff -u please =]


Mime
View raw message