A Quick update, I tried this with low level google api and that seems
to work perfectly fine and i am able to retrieve values from the
existing cache and don't load it from db everytime hence reduces my
jvm restart load time by 3-4 seconds.

Not sure what jsr 107 was not working.

Thanks,
Rahul


On May 25, 10:24 pm, Rahul <[email protected]> wrote:
> Ikai,
>
> I am guessing i am wrong somewhere in designing this cache solution.
> Would appreciate if you can tell me where am i going wrong on this.
> Let me try to explain it once again.
>
> I have a set of properties which i load on first call to the service.
> and the code I call in the service is as follows.
>
> PropertiesCache _cache = PropertiesCache.getInstance();
>
> My PropertiesCache is as follows.
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> public class PropertiesCache {
>         private static final Logger log =
> Logger.getLogger(PropertiesCache.class.getName());
>
>         private static PropertiesCache _instance;
>         private Cache cache;
>         private PropertiesCache() {
>                 try {
>                         log.info("In the PropertiesCache constructor");
>                         cache =
> CacheManager.getInstance().getCacheFactory().createCache(Collections.emptyMap());
>                         //Loading the cache from the database.
>                         //cache.put(Object, Object);
>                 } catch (CacheException e) {
>                         log.severe("Error in creating the Loading Cache");
>                 }
>
>         public static synchronized PropertiesCache getInstance() {
>                 if (_instance == null) {
>                         _instance = new PropertiesCache();
>                 }else{
>                         log.info("Using existing cache instance and NO NEW 
> Instance is
> created");
>                 }
>
>                 return _instance;
>         }
>
> Also, Let me re-iterate what you said, you are suggesting me not to
> play around with instance variable instead use the cache variable and
> is there any way i can fetch the cache variable once the jvm restarts.
>
> Appreciate all the efforts.
>
> Thanks,
> Rahul
> On May 25, 5:08 pm, "Ikai L (Google)" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > The instance itself will be recreated. If you store a value into Memcache,
> > it will likely be there the next time you retrieve it. Try this out.
>
> > It's not necessary to do what you've done here. When you create a Cache
> > instance, you're really just creating a client to the cache, and you can do
> > this each time you need it. There's no need to create a global, long-lived
> > instance. What you're seeing is perfectly normal - Java objects will not
> > have a longer lifespan than the JVM. If the JVM dies, so will all the
> > instantiated objects.
>
> > On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 1:28 PM, Rahul <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > Toby,
>
> > > I also had the same opinion but as you can see the previous code i
> > > have given populates the cache again. I guess i am doing something
> > > wrong. Appreciate if you can look at that and let me know if i have to
> > > do something which i missing.
>
> > > Thanks,
> > > Rahul
>
> > > On May 25, 4:00 pm, Toby Reyelts <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > Rahul,
>
> > > > If you're using App Engine's MemcacheService directly (or indirectly, 
> > > > for
> > > > example through our JSR 107 support), then you are talking to backend
> > > > memcache instances that have lifetimes separate from your JVMs.
>
> > > > I.E. MemcacheServiceFactory.getMemcacheService<
> > >http://code.google.com/appengine/docs/java/javadoc/com/google/appengi...()
>
> > > > does
> > > > not create a new memcache backend - it just "connects" to an existing
> > > one.
> > > > You have one logical memcache backend that is shared between all of your
> > > > application's JVMs.
>
> > > > On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 3:12 PM, Rahul <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > Ikai,
>
> > > > > I am not sure what you mean by Memcache instances stays up because i
> > > > > tried the following code and everytime when a new jvm instance is
> > > > > created, the cache instance is also created again. Below is the code i
> > > > > am using, let me know if i am missing anything or not doing anything
> > > > > correct.
>
> > > > > Request comes from the following code:
>
> > > > > MyCache _cache = MyCache.getInstance();
> > > > > redirectUrl = _cache.findInCache(requestedURI);
>
> > > > > MyCache Class:
>
> > > > >        private static MyCache _instance;
> > > > >        private Cache cache;
>
> > > > >        public static synchronized MyCache getInstance() {
> > > > >                if (_instance == null) {
> > > > >                        _instance = new MyCache();
> > > > >                }else{
> > > > >                        log.info("Using existing cache instance and NO
> > > NEW
> > > > > Instance is
> > > > > created");
> > > > >                }
>
> > > > >                return _instance;
> > > > >        }
>
> > > > > and in the constructor i am creating new cache fetching everything
> > > > > from the database.
>
> > > > > Also, i have a listener in place which tells me when the new jvm
> > > > > instance is started.
>
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Rahul
>
> > > > > On May 24, 3:56 pm, "Ikai L (Google)" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > Memcache instances stay up. They're shared, namespaced (security)
> > > > > instances
> > > > > > and will more likely than not outlive the lifecycles of your
> > > application
> > > > > > instances.
>
> > > > > > On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 11:17 PM, Tristan <
> > > [email protected]
> > > > > >wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Does anyone know the answer to this:
>
> > > > > > > If all the JVMs are killed, does the memcache stick around or is 
> > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > recycled? (I know memcache expires eventually, just curious if it
> > > is
> > > > > > > possible for it to carry data across JVM valley of death)
>
> > > > > > > Cheers,
>
> > > > > > > Tristan
>
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> > > > > Groups
> > > > > > > "Google App Engine for Java" group.
> > > > > > > To post to this group, send email to
> > > > > > > [email protected].
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > > > [email protected]<google-appengine-java%[email protected]><google-appengine-java%2B
> > > [email protected]><google-appengine-java%2B
> > > > > [email protected]>
> > > > > > > .
> > > > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en.
>
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Ikai Lan
> > > > > > Developer Relations, Google App Engine
> > > > > > Twitter:http://twitter.com/ikai
> > > > > > Delicious:http://delicious.com/ikailan
>
> > > > > > ----------------
> > > > > > Google App Engine links:
> > > > > > Blog:http://googleappengine.blogspot.com
> > > > > > Twitter:http://twitter.com/app_engine
> > > > > > Reddit:http://www.reddit.com/r/appengine
>
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> > > Groups
> > > > > "Google App Engine for Java" group.
> > > > > > To post to this group, send email to
> > > > > [email protected].
> > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > [email protected]<google-appengine-java%[email protected]><google-appengine-java%2B
> > > [email protected]>
> > > > > .
> > > > > > For more options, visit this group athttp://
> > > > > groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en.
>
> > > > > --
> > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> > > Groups
> > > > > "Google App Engine for Java" group.
> > > > > To post to this group, send email to
> > > > > [email protected].
> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > [email protected]<google-appengine-java%[email protected]><google-appengine-java%2B
> > > [email protected]>
> > > > > .
> > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en.
>
> > > --
> > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > > "Google App Engine for Java" group.
> > > To post to this group, send email to
> > > [email protected].
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > [email protected]<google-appengine-java%[email protected]>
> > > .
> > > For more options, visit this group at
> > >http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en.
>
> > --
> > Ikai Lan
> > Developer Programs Engineer, Google App Engine
> > Twitter:http://twitter.com/ikai
> > Delicious:http://delicious.com/ikailan
>
> > ----------------
> > Google App Engine links:
> > Blog:http://googleappengine.blogspot.com
> > Twitter:http://twitter.com/app_engine
> > Reddit:http://www.reddit.com/r/appengine
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google App Engine for Java" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine-java?hl=en.

Reply via email to