durusmail: durus-users: Doubt about cache and ghost objects
Doubt about cache and ghost objects
2006-05-24
2006-05-25
Possible bug in cache code: Re: [Durus-users] Doubt about cache and ghost objects
2006-05-25
Re: Possible bug in cache code: Re: [Durus-users] Doubt about cache and ghost objects
2006-05-25
2006-05-26
Re: Possible bug in cache code: Re: [Durus-users] Doubt about cache and ghost objects
2006-05-25
Doubt about cache and ghost objects
Jesus Cea
2006-05-24
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I'm surely missing something important, but why are ghost objects keept
in the cache?. When we invalidate some objects in the cache, because
they are modified in the storage (in the "commit" or "abort" calls), why
don't we simply delete them from the cache?.

With current approach, "connection.get_cache_count()" is not
representative of real cached objects (and RAM usage), since it counts
also ghost objects that must be fetched from server if touched.

Thanks in advance for the explanation :-)

- --
Jesus Cea Avion                         _/_/      _/_/_/        _/_/_/
jcea@argo.es http://www.argo.es/~jcea/ _/_/    _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/
jabber / xmpp:jcea@jabber.org         _/_/    _/_/          _/_/_/_/_/
                               _/_/  _/_/    _/_/          _/_/  _/_/
"Things are not so easy"      _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/
"My name is Dump, Core Dump"   _/_/_/        _/_/_/      _/_/  _/_/
"El amor es poner tu felicidad en la felicidad de otro" - Leibniz
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQCVAwUBRHSpnplgi5GaxT1NAQJdIAP/YKznE2/4KDOOWFuxm1h1WjyDH/+yJa/z
XYW67PLn1B3WJm//uNn95dUXoCHE9ShbsM0ux09Z9bz46n2b7lbvfTAvAqklqQvl
sCwqhkXCytWHCH8tanyj+CzgboA00zR0+TAQIy+sEt5ZnWwjpTGMEgNdWLbHzkhR
lYWqZMghR4E=
=Vyjx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
reply