> Hmm... I'm still not convinced that cache TTL has more to do with the > DB specifics than the object model/class specifics but since the > example is flexible enough to support both it's fine by me. :) > > (Although the naming should be tweaked a bit in the example, > since 'short' et al is not a class as in cache-class.)
'short' in the example is just some name/id that the user defined for one class in the longevity classification. It could also have been called 'John' or something :-) You're right though that cache-class would not be a good name, perhaps cache-level or similar would be better ? > Where I have seen the need for this, some objects are extremely long-lived > and most others not. Regression tests etc are not concerned about cache > timeouts at all (the cache should be, and is currently, completely > transparent) > - HSQLDB or Oracle would use the same object-level caching timeouts. But perhaps not if you use different caches, i.e. something like Coherence for the real app and integration testing, and a simpler cache for development and unit tests. After all you setup the cache for the target system, and usually the development systems differ from the target systems, esp. in terms of memory and i/o throughput. Tom --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
