J.Miller wrote:
> The easiest way would be to put all never-expires items in their own cache that
> never needs to be locked at all.
Yes, but what when A is a less frequent expiring item, then we have
still the same problem..
anyway thanks for bringing suggestions!
I really appreciate them.
// R
Hi Frans ,
>
> no, it gets more complicated. To be blunt: caching data is a
> tedious task which often goes wrong. Also the purpose of caching is
> misunderstood. My dreaded caching-is-hard-example: say you have 50
> customer objects in the cache. The application wants to load all
> cust
At 11:48 AM 10/12/2004, Ryan Heath wrote
>Merrill wrote:
>> This is where the ReaderWriterLock concept is appropriate
>
>Yes, it sure is, but in my case I'd like to extented it a bit, the
>RWlock should not be held on the cache itself but on the item in the
>cache. Let me explain:
>Say the cache ho
Merrill wrote:
> This is where the ReaderWriterLock concept is appropriate
Yes, it sure is, but in my case I'd like to extented it a bit, the
RWlock should not be held on the cache itself but on the item in the
cache. Let me explain:
Say the cache holds item A and B, A never expires but B expires
At 06:08 AM 10/12/2004, Ryan Heath wrote
>Frans Bouma wrote:
>>If a page cache invalidates, the first request will hit the db,
>> the second will get the cached version.
>
>Yep, sure, but this implies a locking mechanism on the cache /
>cacheItem / cacheKey.
>Anyone ideas how to do this in
On Behalf Of Frans Bouma
> Sent: 12 October 2004 12:19
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] MiddleTier Caching was Abstracting SQL
>
> Isn't that caching header used to control proxy server caches? I.e.:
> when 500,000 desktop boxes connect to your website
: Unmoderated discussion of advanced .NET topics.
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Frans Bouma
Sent: 12 October 2004 12:19
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] MiddleTier Caching was Abstracting SQL
Isn't that caching header used to control proxy server caches? I.e.:
when 50
t;
> Regards,
> Andrew
>
> Developmentor Instructor
> Course Author
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Unmoderated discussion of advanced .NET topics.
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Frans Bouma
> Sent: 12 October 2004 10:28
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ndrew
Developmentor Instructor
Course Author
-Original Message-
From: Unmoderated discussion of advanced .NET topics.
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Frans Bouma
Sent: 12 October 2004 10:28
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] MiddleTier Caching was Abstracting SQL
> Fr
I just knew you would reply this answer, thanks.
===
This list is hosted by DevelopMentor® http://www.develop.com
Some .NET courses you may be interested in:
Essential .NET: building applications and components with CSharp
August 30 - September 3, in Los Angeles
h
> -Original Message-
> From: Unmoderated discussion of advanced .NET topics.
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ryan Heath
> Sent: Dienstag, 12. Oktober 2004 12:35
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] MiddleTier Caching was Abstracting SQL
&g
Thomas,
Frans did not explicitly refer to asp.net and I was referring to VB6.
Also in my case, I cache html-parts of a page, therefor I cannot use
the IIS output cache.
When I say cache, I mean storing the html string into an
hashtable-a-like object with a timeout period specifying how long the
ob
Message-
> From: Unmoderated discussion of advanced .NET topics.
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ryan Heath
> Sent: Dienstag, 12. Oktober 2004 12:08
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] MiddleTier Caching was Abstracting SQL
>
> Frans Bouma wrote
Frans Bouma wrote:
>If a page cache invalidates, the first request will hit the db,
> the second will get the cached version.
Yep, sure, but this implies a locking mechanism on the cache /
cacheItem / cacheKey.
Anyone ideas how to do this in VB6? I rather not want to lock the
cache itself,
> Frans Bouma wrote:
> > To save webserver power because the website gets 500,000
> hits per day?
> > Perhaps a page caching with 1 minute per page will help. Often that
> > will give much more performance boosts than lowlevel caching with a
> > lot of overhead.
> >
> This is what we often do,
Frans Bouma wrote:
> To save webserver power because the website gets 500,000 hits per
> day? Perhaps a page caching with 1 minute per page will help. Often that
> will give much more performance boosts than lowlevel caching with a lot
> of overhead.
>
This is what we often do, but when the cache i
> -Original Message-
> From: Ben Kloosterman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > In our case we must implement Object Query - long story, business
> > requerement. However, I see these two ideas complementing each
other;
> > there is no conflict.
> [Ben Kloosterman]
> You can use them as you c
>
> Thanks Ben. I never thought to cache data in BL/DAL based on query.
For me
> it has always been the UI responsible for persisting relevant data, be
it
> WebForms Cache or local form variable. I was so used to doing it I
never
> even gave it a second thought.
[Ben Kloosterman]
Your cache wor
18 matches
Mail list logo
