Geoff Howard wrote:
>
> > From: Unico Hommes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > I can't believe I've missed this post. Damn.
> > > Below is the larger picture I envision for a new kind of cache
> > > invaliditation
> ...
> > > depending on other factors might never come. It seems to me more
> >
> From: Unico Hommes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> I can't believe I've missed this post. Damn.
> > Below is the larger picture I envision for a new kind of cache
> > invaliditation
...
> > depending on other factors might never come. It seems to me more
> fitting
> > with the transient nature of e
I can't believe I've missed this post. Damn.
>
> Below is the larger picture I envision for a new kind of cache
> invaliditation
> that I've needed in the past and comes up in requests from people
using
> EJB
> or
> database driven data that is cacheable. I'd love feedback from anyone
> who's
>
Geoff Howard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Below is the larger picture I envision for a new kind of
> cache invaliditation that I've needed in the past and comes
> up in requests from people using EJB or database driven data
> that is cacheable. I'd love feedback from anyone who's
> interest
