What would happen if I implemented an AlwaysEmptyCache ? (to circumvent the problems of the single instance cache problem)
Here are my thoughts on the advantages of an ordinary cache mentioned on http://jakarta.apache.org/ojb/objectcache.html : "it increases performance as it reduces database lookups. If an object is looked up by the PersistenceBroker, it does not perform a SELECT against the database immediately but first looks up the cache if the requested object is already loaded. If the object is cached it is returned as the lookup result. If it is not cached a SELECT is performed." If I need this performance, I could just implement a usercontrolled cache for the specific performance problem. And this performance gains is only happening if one is trying to lookup via primary keys... "it maintains the uniqueness of objects. If several queries ask for an object with the same Identity (OID) they will receive one and the same object from the cache. This will prevent your applications from working with divergent copies of objects with the same Identity." ...but a single cache does not prevent my application threads messing up each others work (actually it will happen at some point!) ...secondly, uniqueness is not always guaranteed (according to previous posts) and then one cannot write code under this assumption anyway! "it allows to perform circular lookups (as by crossreferenced objects) that would result in non-terminating loops without such a cache." ...is not happening if you do use autoretreive (which I cannot see the usage for in databases with big object-nets/graph) Any other comments ? /max -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
