On Wednesday 13 September 2006 20:20, Matt Sergeant wrote: > I suppose it's a chicken and egg problem - maybe you don't want to > try AxKit2 if it doesn't have the same caching system as AxKit1, or > maybe if you tried it you'd like the new system. Either way, speak up > and we'll see what should be done.
Now, I haven't looked at what Ax2 actually do, but our work system has suffered badly from having a simple API for caching. I've come to think that having simple methods that I can implement to return mtime and expiry is a critical feature. For TABOO, the plan is that my objects also have an mtime and a expiry, implemented as cheaply as possible will make the mtime's of the Providers really small, but critical. I think that in a pipeline, the possibility of caching all along the pipeline would be nice in some cases, so that certain requests will not be passed all the way down to the DB, even though the served resource is a composite of several components. I envision that HTTP's caching specification could also be used internally in the pipeline, so that if you suddenly decide to throw a part of the pipe away, the client or a proxy will still see and use HTTP headers for caching. I haven't had time to look properly into Ax2, and I now recognize the value of patches more than I did back when I started, but since you asked, then yeah, a caching infrastructure is a very compelling feature... :-) Cheers, Kjetil -- Kjetil Kjernsmo Programmer / Astrophysicist / Ski-orienteer / Orienteer / Mountaineer [EMAIL PROTECTED] Homepage: http://www.kjetil.kjernsmo.net/ OpenPGP KeyID: 6A6A0BBC --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
