Ard Schrijvers wrote
> Hello, I have been thinking about a solution for point (1), to have the 
> StoreJanitor only free memory from caches you did not define as "not to free 
> from". It is not hard at all to implement, but I am not sure about the 
> "politics", so here are my concerns:
> 
> Ideally I would like:
> 
> 1) To change the StoreJanitor, to free a percentage of all caches at ones, 
> and not one after another. Also, only from caches that have a parameter that 
> says that they a "freeable" or something (and for backwardscompatibility of 
> course also when the param is missing)
> 
> 2) To change the Store interface that store implementations should have a 
> method isFreeable()
> 3) Then all store implementations should implement isFreeable().
> 
> Now, I suppose this is of course NOT possible....at least I think. I suppose 
> a contract is a contract, right? And if we would like to change it, it is an 
> excalibur project.
> 
> How can I achieve this?
> 
I think in the long run we should get away from the excalibur components
anyway, so I we could introduce our own store (again) in trunk and use
our own interfaces/components.

Carsten

-- 
Carsten Ziegeler - Open Source Group, S&N AG
http://www.s-und-n.de
http://www.osoco.org/weblogs/rael/

Reply via email to