Its right there: http://ehcache.org/documentation/get-started/key-classes-methods
So I guess my point to the dev's is if you want to upgrade to ehcache 2.5.2 or even 2.6.1+ there is a significant change in behaviour post 2.5.1. Any suggestions for how CXF would either handle both versions with perhaps a different EHCacheManagerHolder? On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Jason Pell <[email protected]> wrote: > Ok so I understand now. We are using ehcache 2.5.2. And > create(Configuration) method in 2.5.2 is different to 2.5.1. > > In 2.5.1 if you call it checks the name of the Configuration and > creates a new cache manager with this name. > > In 2.5.2 the same method does something quite different. If any code > has called CacheManager.create() previously this will cause the > singleton to be initialised and in 2.5.2 all the create methods ignore > the Configuration name if the singleton has a value. > > The newInstance methods in CacheManager do what is expected of them by > CXF in 2.5.2 and onwards. > > Very strange to have such a significant change in behaviour between > point releases. > > On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 10:07 AM, Jason Pell <[email protected]> wrote: >> Realised its not what I thought. The cache manager is named according >> to the cxf bus id and thus is not the same name as the default cache >> manager. So I must have another problem. Will investigate further. >> >> Please ignore my issue for now :-) >> >> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 8:30 AM, Jason Pell <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I have run into a problem because by default the ehcache replaycache code >>> results in sharing the global eh cache manager. (The CacheManager.create() >>> call) >>> >>> This is a problem if using ehcache for ldap user cache if i restart an >>> endpoint because the cache manager is shutdown by cxf. >>> >>> I am still investigating the ideal approach to this whether its to implement >>> my own replay cache or contribute patches to configure whether to shut down >>> the manager or let some other non cxf trigger do that. >>> >>> I am leaning towards the latter.
