Oh my goodness. Not again. I thought someone else posted his tests of retrieval
speeds regarding this?
Call it what it is, and we'll always be alert to necessities for change. Side note: No point
telling everybody "it's all there, you just can't find it", when they might have the ability to
actually confirm without doubt that parts of functionalities are not there.
I don't have time to write every reason there is for OFBiz's caching, please. Of course it's good
to be able to specifically spell out to OFBiz which entities you want cached; RDBMS do not always
know (if at all) which entities should be cached more. The designer of the software will know the
usage pattern the software is designed for. So how many points do I get for that answer? :) Sigh.
So would you mind listing all the reasons for OFBiz's caching of the database entries? :) You
designed it, I believe. You would know. Thanks!
Jonathon
David E Jones wrote:
On Apr 19, 2008, at 2:04 AM, Jonathon -- Improov wrote:
Chris is right that dynamic view entities are exactly like view
entities. Both run through the same Entity Engine. Caching by OFBiz is
also good, though much slower than RDBMS-native caches;
Really? What would be the point of local caching on the app server then?
(hint: it definitely isn't for database independence)
Have you actually done tests on this to see what typical times look
like, even for a database running on the same machine?
-David
