Hi Bradley, the cache is managed entirely by SCCM. Once cache provisioned space is reached then sccm agent deletes some old cache to get enough space for the newly advertised one.
I have no clue why the old cache is kept. The only way i see where a package will regain its old version number would be if you restore the entire hierarchy from an old backup. 2014-05-02 18:30 GMT+02:00 Beardsley, James <[email protected]>: > Question about the local cache. The common scenario I run into (common > for me at least) is I have an app that I push out to a machine and it > downloads to cache. Then I realize I need to make a change to the install > script for example so I update the content to include the new version of > the install script (rest of the files stay the same). As you know, it > creates a new cache folder for the new version that's identical to the old > version, just the script file has been updated. Why wouldn't it just update > the one file that has changed in the existing cache folder? Seems to me > that this is just needlessly taking up extra space. Especially if the app > is several hundred MB, not only does it take extra time to re-download the > entire package source but it would also require double the hdd space. It > did that in 2007 as well (correct me if I'm wrong) so I guess I'm just > curious if anyone knows the reasoning behind that - maybe I'm not thinking > of something. What's the logic for keeping old versions of cache if its > never going to be used again? And also, is there a way to programmatically > remove the cache folder for an old version? Or does it do that on its own > after a certain period of time? > > > > Thanks, > > *James Beardsley | *Firm Technology Group > > Dixon Hughes Goodman LLP > > > > [image: Description: Description: Description: > cid:[email protected]] > > > ------------------------------ > > *IRS Compliance:* Any tax advice contained in this communication > (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and > cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties imposed under the > Internal Revenue Code or applicable state or local tax law or (ii) > promoting, marketing, or recommending to another party any transaction or > matter addressed herein. > ------------------------------ > > *Confidentiality Notice:* This e-mail is intended only for the addressee > named above. It contains information that is privileged, confidential or > otherwise protected from use and disclosure. If you are not the intended > recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, disclosure, copying, or > dissemination of this transmission, or taking of any action in reliance on > its contents, or other use is strictly prohibited. If you have received > this transmission in error, please reply to the sender listed above > immediately and permanently delete this message from your inbox. Thank you > for your cooperation. > >
