Julian Reschke wrote:
The store the SPI implementation talks to internally may be on a separate machine, so verifying that something is up-to-date (for read access) would actually defy the caching in the first place, wouldn't it?
IMO an SPI implementation was never meant to cache anything. it is meant to be as stateless as possible and translate SPI calls into calls on the back-end. if an implementation reads more than it was asked for it may pass it to the client of the SPI and hope it will be cached there.
Or do you expect SPI implementations to keep cached information up-to-date by some kind of observation mechanism?
yes, if there is a cache present the implementation should maintain the cache on its own without additional information from an SPI client.
regards marcel
