Cache is intended for something that will be used repeatedly
throughout the application by different users. Session is intended for
per-user data. Both caches (because that's what Session is too, it's
little different than Application.Cache) have the same machine
affinity that limits them when it comes to scaling.

∞ Andy Badera
∞ +1 518-641-1280
∞ This email is: [ ] bloggable [x] ask first [ ] private
∞ Google me: http://www.google.com/search?q=andrew%20badera



On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 12:52 PM, Ana <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> What about caching the table? Is this a good way to do it?
>
> On Sep 25, 10:47 am, Andrew Badera <[email protected]> wrote:
>> You _can_ put "anything" into Session. Beware possible (probable?)
>> performance/scaling issues however.
>>
>> ∞ Andy Badera
>> ∞ +1 518-641-1280
>> ∞ This email is: [ ] bloggable [x] ask first [ ] private
>> ∞ Google me:http://www.google.com/search?q=andrew%20badera
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 12:35 PM, Ana <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi,
>>
>> > I'm binding a Data Table based on the Directory Structure and in
>> > information retrieved from the DB. First I add all records from the
>> > Data Base into the table and then I go through each node of a TreeView
>> > (the TreeView matches the Directory Structure) and, if a record is not
>> > in the Data Base (and consequently in the table), I add it to the
>> > table.
>> > Because this is a quite slow operation and I need the table a lot of
>> > times, I would like to keep this DataTable even after a post back
>> > occurs. Is this something possible, or every time I have to re-bind
>> > the table?
>>
>> > Thanks,
>>
>> > Ana
>

Reply via email to