On 27/11/2016 19:45, Rasmus Schultz wrote:
PSR-6 used the "pool" concept rather than "server" specifically for
this reason; each "pool" is a separate logical namespace independent of
any other pool, and two pool objects should not interact. They could
both be backed by a file system (separate directories), or by the same
SQL database connection (separate tables), or entirely separate Redis
servers, or the same Redis server with automatic prefixing... that's all
an implementation detail. At a logical level they're independent
collections.
Yeah, this perfectly summarizes what I managed to put in way too many
words. Thanks, Larry :-)
Good to see I can skip the book you wrote in the previous email because
I'm a bit short on time atm ;)
I hear from Nicolas Grekas that the way PSR-6 does it is fine and
generally not an impl problem so I guess I'm fine treating every "Cache"
as a pool, I agree it does make it easier to interop and makes it
possible for libs to use flush() without wreaking havoc.
I'd be very happy if you or Larry could work on a spec PR that does this
fine tuning of words though as I am kinda swamped..
Cheers
--
Jordi Boggiano
@seldaek - http://seld.be
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PHP
Framework Interoperability Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to php-fig+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to php-fig@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/php-fig/572634c1-1c9a-f716-c801-ef5817a0fc6d%40seld.be.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
