I don't see the merit.
Views are simply a bunch of Response.Write methods.
"caching" them would mean nothing.  ASP.NET will still need to
Response.Write into the responseStream, just the same. it just won't spend
memory.

server side caching should be done on other levels. cache results of
expensive and/or out-of-process calls.

On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 11:27 AM, Jokin Cuadrado <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
> i have read this
> http://haacked.com/archive/2008/11/05/donut-caching-in-asp.net-mvc.aspx
> about view caching in monorail, i know that one of the caveats at
> monorail is precisely the lack of view caching, and i wonder if it is
> because a technical limitation or if it could be easily doable with
> the current architechture.
>
> What will be the necesary steps?
>
>
> >
>


-- 
Ken Egozi.
http://www.kenegozi.com/blog
http://www.musicglue.com
http://www.castleproject.org
http://www.gotfriends.co.il

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Castle Project Users" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-users?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to