Ross Gardler wrote:
Tim Williams wrote:
On 2/10/06, Tim Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It seems to me that implementing CacheableProcessingComponent with an
input module like LM isn't feasible since there's only one instance of
it and it won't help us cache at the more granular level. I think I
confirmed that by following it through it's lifecycle this evening.
Anyway, Ross is on to correcting the validity issue so I thought I'd
spend some time on figuring out how to get away from our
homegrown-hashmap-cache. I think instead of trying to use the cocoon
cache, the answer is to manage validity ourselves and go directly to
the store. This gets our little lm cache "managed" with the real
cocoon store as i think it should be.
The only problem that I can foresee is our current transient store is
set with:
<parameter name="maxobjects" value="100"/>
100 seems extremely small to me anyway but I think if we started to
use it for the lm, we'd find that it's definitely too small and would
spend as much resources cleaning itself as to make it not worth it.
Anyone know why it shouldn't be larger?
Does storing lm cached hints in the transient store seem reasonable?
Thanks,
--tim
FYI. I'm not very keen on implementing it yet, but we may be forced to
decide just how important this is to us. We'll see if I get any other
responses, but I'm not holding my breath...
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=113995323300001&r=1&w=2
Thanks for following through Tim.
I've been looking at the use of MultiSourceValidity. It's not trivial
unfortunately. The way mounted sitemaps are handled is causing problems
(simply put they are handled differently depending on whether they are
in a select or not). We need to refactor the handling of mounted
locationmaps.
That should read "the way mounted *locationmaps* are handled". This is a
Forrest issue, not a Cocoon one.
Ross
I've got a solution, but it seems "hacky". I want to find the time to
look at how Cocoon handles mounted sitemaps and see if we can learn from
that.
With respect to the use of Cocoons store Vs. our current home grown
solution. I think it is unlikely that we will hit the memory limits
within the locationmap. The items we are storing are small (strings) and
the number is relatively low. Even in a very large site it is unlikely
to go beyond a few thousand items.
If it becomes a problem we can reconsider.
Speaking personally, I need the ability to invalidate the locationmap
tree when any of the mounted maps are changed. The move to
MultiSourceValidity will solve this problem. I'm not too concerned right
now about being able to control the locationmap cache from within the
sitemap, as long as we can control it from forrest.properties (which we
already can).
Ross
