Isn't caching a Node dangerous, as you have no way of knowing it hasn't been removed from the tree? Unless you add a CacheListener just for that. jbosscache-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org wrote: > Use Cache for cache-wide operations like getRegion(), etc. > > Use Node to manipulate data in the node, retrieve child nodes, etc. > This way refs to Nodes - buckets of data storage - can be > cached since it is these that would be most frequently used. > >> It does. But then, does it mean I need to keep both the reference >> for >> Cache and "parent" Node at the same time? Although Cache is a >> wrapper, it does have some additional APIs like evict and also >> getRegion() that doesn't exist in Node. Or what's your >> recommendation? >> >> Actually, currently I am keeping the CacheSPI reference (and also >> possibly NodeSPI in the future when it has life of its own) >> within my >> code. Keeping the Node reference doesn't seem to make much sense to >> me, although this can be just a pattern for the customed cache >> provider (e.g., PojoCache). >> >> -Ben >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Manik Surtani [mailto:manik@jboss.org] >> Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 12:10 AM >> To: Ben Wang >> Cc: Bela Ban; jbosscache-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> Subject: Re: [jbosscache-dev] Some new Cache usage questions >> >> >> On 4 Sep 2006, at 16:58, Ben Wang wrote: >> >>> 1. I suspect people using JBC for session management purpose won't >>> store the Node ref but the Cache instead. Brian can say better but >>> for example of the http session, unless you store the root Node, >>> otherwise caching the children Node is not that useful. >> >> Node jSessionNode = Cache.getChild(Fqn.fromString("/ JSESSIONID")); >> // this can be cached... Node sessionNode = >> jSessionNode.getChild(Fqn.fromString (sessionId)); // this can be >> retrieved every time... >> >> Does this help in any way? >> >> >>> >>> 2. ic. Do we have explicit contract for Cache to be "root" Node >>> only? I mean, even getRoot() is just a self pointer, it still >>> serves the purpose, IMO. >> >> From the javadocs: "The cache is essentially a wrapper around the >> default root Node." >> >> > http://labs.jboss.com/file-access/default/members/jbosscache/ > freezone/ >> docs/Habanero/api/org/jboss/cache/Cache.html >> >> >>> >>> -Ben >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Manik Surtani [mailto:manik@jboss.org] >>> Sent: Monday, September 04, 2006 7:06 PM >>> To: Ben Wang >>> Cc: Bela Ban; jbosscache-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>> Subject: Re: [jbosscache-dev] Some new Cache usage questions >>> >>> Not in your case, no. But many other use cases will be able to >>> cache a node and use it directly. >>> >>> I too would rather keep the API clean in this regard. Also, calling >>> cache.getRoot() is redundant since the Cache interface is a wrapper >>> around the root Node. In fact, I even think we should get rid of >>> the getRoot() method. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> -- >>> Manik Surtani >>> >>> Lead, JBoss Cache >>> JBoss, a division of Red Hat >>> >>> Email: manik(a)jboss.org >>> Telephone: +44 7786 702 706 >>> MSN: manik(a)surtani.org >>> Yahoo/AIM/Skype: maniksurtani >>> >>> >>> On 1 Sep 2006, at 15:49, Ben Wang wrote: >>> >>>> Thing is I only do put to specific fqn once. So caching it doesn't >>>> buy you anything. >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Bela Ban >>>> Sent: Friday, September 01, 2006 10:22 PM >>>> To: Ben Wang >>>> Cc: jbosscache-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>> Subject: Re: [jbosscache-dev] Some new Cache usage questions >>>> >>>> My 2 cents: I'd rather keep the API clean, at the expense of folks >>>> potentially writing wrapping code (like Ben). >>>> >>>> Your code samples look a bit weird: >>>> #1 >>>> Why do you always get the child ? Can't you get the node and cache >>>> it, e.g. Node n=cache.getRoot().getChild(fqn); >>>> n.containsKey(PojoInstance.KEY) >>>> >>>> #2 >>>> Same as for #1: you don't need to call cache.getRoot().getChild >>>> (fqn) all the time, for example in a loop, simply cache it >>>> >>>> >>>> Ben Wang wrote: >>>>> Manik, >>>>> >>>>> While trying to use the new API in PojoCache, I have found that I >>>>> need to: >>>>> >>>>> 1. To check if a attribute exist, I need to do: >>>>> cache_.getRoot().getChild(fqn_).getData().values().contains >>>>> (PojoInstance.KEY) >>>>> >>>>> 2. And then, I need to do a lot of cache_.getRoot().getChild >>>>> (fqn).put(map) >>>>> >>>>> So looks like I need to write a wrapper layer just to provide >>>>> straight api for: >>>>> >>>>> Cache_.exists(fqn, key) >>>>> And >>>>> Cache_.put(fqn, map) >>>>> >>>>> If this is rare case, then I will bite the bullet. But if it is a >>>>> common one, then that really begs the question whether we should >>>>> provide additional apis or not? >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Bela Ban >>>> Lead JGroups / Manager JBoss Clustering Group JBoss - a division >>>> of Red Hat >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> jbosscache-dev mailing list >>>> jbosscache-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosscache-dev >>> >> > > _______________________________________________ > jbosscache-dev mailing list > jbosscache-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbosscache-dev Brian Stansberry Lead, AS Clustering JBoss, a division of Red Hat Ph: 510-396-3864 skype: bstansberry