jshowalter wrote :
| - if all of the data in a node ages out of the cache due to LRU, is the
data removed from the cache and the node left in place, or is the node also
removed?
|
Like I said, the unit of atomicity is a node. So, it is an entire node that
times out due to LRU, not any
How does one go about adding a single data item to a node? Do we have to
provide a key at all in that case, or can we just call put(fqn, the data item)?
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4221397#4221397
Reply to the post :
You'd use a key. A dummy key if it is irrelevant to you, e.g., a public static
final Object DUMMY_KEY that you could define.
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bbop=viewtopicp=4221427#4221427
Reply to the post :
That should prevent phantom reads, shouldn't it? -- Sorry, I meant dirty
reads. The way we're using the cache makes phantom reads not a problem. And
read committed prevents dirty reads. So I think we're in good shape--I have a
single-data-item-per-node version of the cache up and running now
jshowalter wrote :
| We realize this is by design and documented as such, but the design puzzles
us. The put should succeed if the node is there but the key for the data being
put is missing, and should succeed if the node and key are there but the value
in the node for that key is null.
|
Thank you for the quick reply. Two followup questions (one from the original
post):
- if all of the data in a node ages out of the cache due to LRU, is the data
removed from the cache and the node left in place, or is the node also removed?
- but you do introduce the possibility of phantom
