On 2/14/07, Andrew Klochkov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I looked at pages second level cache implementation in 1.3 and wonder > why not to use ehcache instead?
Exactly what I have advocated, and which is why it is had the name 'second level cache'. However, I don't think it should be the default, but rather an (easy to configure) option to plugin anything you like as the 'second level cache', be that an actual caching implementation, a database, (virtual) file system or something else. > It's much more intelligent, configurable > and performant. Keep in mind that we're still in the early stages of it. We're currently tweaking the hell out of it though implementing custom serialization, saving changes in a different thread and only for later versions than the last one (which we keep in memory) etc. The point is that by doing it ourselves, we can tweak exactly for what is needed for Wicket. > For example, it can have part of cache in memory while > swapping less frequently used pages on the disk. It's the idea that we'll have flow over support as well. I don't know whether LRU is the best mechanism though. There are probably smarter ways to do this for Wicket, like basing it on recent activity, available memory/ number of active sessions. I don't know just yet, but it's something that is on our mind for investigating. First things first though. Eelco ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Wicket-user mailing list Wicket-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wicket-user
