See my reply to Ned.
Thanks,
Thomas
-----Original Message-----
>From: Ilia Iourovitski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 10:33 AM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: [castor-dev] Strategy Proposal (repost - was: Castor JDO
Status)
>
>I looked yesterday at distributed cache at
>http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine/jcs/
>and I wonder what should be changed in Castor JDO
>except adding invalidate and Cache factory in order to
>use it.
>
>Ilia
>--- Ned Wolpert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> > From: "Thomas Yip" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 18:28:16 -0700
>> >
>> > For example, should distributed cache, and local
>> cache put
>> > together. Sound like it is, right? But, I don't
>> think so. In my
>> > opinion, distributed cache should be implemented
>> as cache
>> > purging policy. It should actually not part of
>> cache
>> > implementation, and they shouldn't be put
>> together.
>>
>> I want to see about clarification on this issue,
>> since this is
>> specifically important to me. I've argued that
>> caching systems should
>> be 'plug-in'. Meaning, an API for the cache is
>> defined, and a factory
>> object exists that can be referenced in the
>> castor.properties file of
>> which cache factory to use to get the cache. The API
>> needs to allow
>> for multiple caches from the one factory (LRU count
>> versus
>> time-limited) but allows the implementation to vary.
>> This opens open
>> implementation to other developers.
>>
>> I understand that the main affect we need for a
>> distribute cache is
>> simply the ability to remove objects from the cache.
>> That way, one
>> can build a distributed system to allow this.
>> However, for me, that
>> is only the beginning. Regardless; I would like to
>> propose a change
>> to the current caching system... rather than make
>> the cache system
>> 'private' and fixed in the current implementation,
>> allow me to make
>> modifications that would open the api for a
>> 'plugable' cache system.
>> Castor out-of-the-box would see no change; but allow
>> for developers to
>> add in their own caching system.
>>
>> Comments? (I've been dying to do this for a long
>> time)
>>
>> - --
>>
>> Virtually,
>> Ned Wolpert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>> D08C2F45: 28E7 56CB 58AC C622 5A51 3C42 8B2B 2739
>> D08C 2F45
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
>> Comment: Public key at http://www.keyserver.net
>>
>>
>iD8DBQE8zsEoiysnOdCML0URAkuzAJ9g5QKUEYfZ2a2fwqp115b1P6LeWwCffIsk
>> YuIc5AYbLiqUJVbWaQ8ldgY=
>> =MDyL
>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>
>>
>-----------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> If you wish to unsubscribe from this mailing, send
>> mail to
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of:
>> unsubscribe castor-dev
>>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness
>http://health.yahoo.com
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------
>If you wish to unsubscribe from this mailing, send mail to
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of:
> unsubscribe castor-dev
>
-----------------------------------------------------------
If you wish to unsubscribe from this mailing, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of:
unsubscribe castor-dev
