Hi Mario, I did not want to offend anyone. I just wanted somebody to clarify to me the cache related behavior. And I think that now I have a clearer picture. If caching redesign is high on the priority list for the next version that is enough for my needs :-)
And for now I have a functional workaround. Using the .close() method is OK. Let's focus on the next release ;-) Regards, Robert On 11/23/05, Mario Ivankovits <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Robert, > > having a system bulid around a cache is an architectural design flaw, > there is nothing else to say - we all know that - POINT. > > To excuse myself: when I jumped into VFS development this cache was > already a long living, persistent, *never freed* map. > The first thing I did was to fix this "memory leak". Unhappily, this > time I havent had enough knowledge to remove the cache at all. > > Wrong decision, well ... maybe. > As I said, it is on the todo list - and at a rather high position. > > For now please call .close() and lets find a CLEAN solution later. > > Thanks! > > --- > Mario > > >
