Re: [eclipselink-users] J2SE Caching Strategy?

[Shaun Smith <shaun.smith@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Tim,

Sounds like you should set caches for non-reference data to "isolated".  Instances of classes who's caches are isolated are not cached in the L2 cache.   Once an EM is closed, objects who's classes are isolated can be GC'd.  I think this will get you the behavior you want.  Here's how the docs describe isolate caching:

Isolated Client Session Cache

This method always goes to the database for the initial read operation of an object whose descriptor is configured as isolated. By avoiding the shared session cache, you do not need to use the more complicated descriptor and query APIs to disable cache hits or always refresh. For more information about isolated client sessions, see Isolated Client Sessions. This is particularly useful for achieving serializable transaction isolation (see What You May Need to Know About Serializable Read Levels)

There are some restrictions on relationships between isolated and shared classes.  Isolated classes can have relationships to shared classes but not vice versa.  This works fine when all your shared objects are reference data.

Does this sound like it'll work for you?

    Shaun

Tim Hollosy wrote:

Shaun,  we are in a client server situation:

~50 RCP apps hitting the same database independently ,so  they would
all technically be "third parties" changing the database behind the
scene, since each client is it's own seperate machine and doesn't
share an L2 cache. So really we need to hit the database 99% of the
time, the 1% of the time we want to hit the cache would be things like
a  list of states pulled from the database to populate a drop down
list. There's no need to hit that every time, but all the other data
is quite volatile.


I think I confused you by talking about multiple EM's, really it
doesn't matter, since the root of the problem is every client is
independent and doesn't share a cache, which would be a common problem
in most J2SE desktop apps.

Hopefull that clears it up :)

Thanks,
Tim




On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 1:40 PM, Shaun Smith <shaun.smith@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
  

 Hi Tim,

    Can you clarify your issues/goals before we get into how best to solve
them?

 So you don't want the EM-2 to see changes committed by EM-1?  Reading from
the database will just get you the same answer as you'll get from the L2
 cache unless you have third parties modifying the database behind the
scenes.  Is this the root problem you're trying to combat?

     Shaun

    

--



Shaun Smith | Principal Product Manager, TopLink | +1.905.502.3094
Oracle Fusion Middleware
110 Matheson Boulevard West, Suite 100
Mississauga, Ontario, Canada L5R 3P4