> stinks. If I were implemeting a cache and there was a
> way to disable the cache I would also cause that to
> flush the cache. Or at least provide some other way to
> do it. Then we'd all be happy.
Disabling the trusted cache option doesn't disable the cache itself, though
- it simply says to CF, "don't use the cache if a newer file exists." As far
as I can determine, the lion's share of the performance advantage that you
get with the cache comes from the cache itself, rather than the "trusted"
aspect of it. So, when you flushed the cache, you'd be losing that
significant performance advantage for the files that haven't been changed,
so that when all your files get recached they'd be a small bit faster. Note
that you can't disable the cache, really - you can set it to a size of zero,
which probably has the same effect, but disabling the trusted cache option
doesn't disable the cache itself.
I do agree with you that an option to flush the cache wouldn't be a bad
thing, as long as it didn't negatively affect performance for those who
didn't want to use it.
Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software
http://www.figleaf.com/
voice: (202) 797-5496
fax: (202) 797-5444
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
