Additionally, a fun thing to look at for Node would be to have a
static cache pre-populated with commonly used resources (RDF, RDFS,
OWL, etc.), similar to Java's Integer.valueOf(int) method. That could
be useful.
-Stephen
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 8:31 AM, Stephen Allen wrote:
> +1 on removal o
+1 on removal of both the node and triple caches.
In addition to the reasons already discussed, there is also the fact
that Node.create() uses a global lock, which is going to be really bad
for concurrency!
Triple.create() doesn't do any locking, which appears to work out OK
in this specific inst
Agreed.
Primary value of a node cache from my POV is space saving for in-memory
models. But that could indeed be done by ARP (if it isn't already) and
is probably better done at the resource level.
I wouldn't expect any significant effect on the rules engines from
scraping these caches.
Da
In JENA-279, the issue of whether the NodeCache serves any useful
purpose these days has come up.
Proposal: Remove the node cache
Proposal: Remove the triple cache
Node cache:
There are two reasons for the cache: time saving (object creation costs)
and space saving (reuse nodes). I'm not sur
