So nodes are cached regardless of persistence manager? That is good to
know. Is it fixed size, most-recently-used?
Harry
Tobias Bocanegra wrote:
hi,
please note, that there are several layer of caching present in
jackrabbit.
there is a cache of the items of the itemmanager (session scope), a
cache of the itemstates of the localeitemstatemanager (session scope),
a cache of the itemstates in the shareditemstatemanager (global
scope).
there is no need for an additional caching.
regards, toby
On 3/17/07, Danner, Russ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
what are the cons of that approach? Is there a background thread
actually persisting the changes? What happens when the machnine
fails for some reason? From the javadoc it looks like a bad option...
like a toy that one would use for testing (it says the class should
only be used for testing.) Maybe it could be adapted to act as a cache.
-R
-----Original Message-----
From: Harry Moore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Fri 3/16/2007 10:45 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: node caching
Looks like InMemPersistenceManager persistance is the way to go.
Harry Moore wrote:
> Is there a way to flag a node, set of nodes or some other segment of a
> jackrabbit repository for high-speed access? That is, cache frequently
> accessed nodes in memory (with write-through update) so they can be
> accesses very quickly.
>
> Thanks,
>
--
Harry Moore
Eye Street Software
Office: 888-252-2085 ext. 3013
Cell: 617-429-3666
--
Harry Moore
Eye Street Software
Office: 888-252-2085 ext. 3013
Cell: 617-429-3666
