I still can't see which one is best in my case. The page I'm working on now is to be used for a few people (maximum 3) and all of them have access to the same information and he table will be used exclusively in the page. I'm using Cache now. But is this the best solution?
Besides, what do you mean by "limits them when it comes to scaling"? Thanks a lot, Andrew! Ana On Sep 25, 10:57 am, Andrew Badera <[email protected]> wrote: > 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
