[news.eclipse.rt.eclipselink] Re: Cache issue

[Enrico <enrico.balatti@xxxxxxxxx>]

I've tested the following situations (also to measure some performance 
results in terms of response time):

1. "eclipselink.cache.type.default"="None"
	It seems work (object is update on DB) but performances are poor;

2. "eclipselink.cache.shared.default"="false"
	It seems to work and performance seems to be better than case 2. 
(response-time is about an half of the previous one)

3. default eclipselink cach (shared and SoftWeak)
	It does not work....on the DB I note the record is updated, but when I 
try to read the object I continuosly get the old value. Performance are 
higher than previous one (response-time is about an half of the previous 
one)

I really would like to have both the better performance but be sure 
objects aI read are up to date.
I will try to run some more test, alo because currently the error seems 
to happen for a specific entity...maybe it can be some problem due to 
relations, LAZY load etc...but I need to investigate in depth.

If you have other ideas please let me know.

BR,
Enrico


James ha scritto:
> I can't see how the cache could be getting out of synch if your database 
> is getting the correct values.  Can you isolate when the corruption 
> occurs exactly?  If you can perhaps log a bug and attach your test 
> case.  The only thing that I can think of is that you call persist/save 
> for an existing object, or you new object has a reference to an existing 
> object, that somehow causes the corruption.
>
> You may also want to try the latest version or build if you have not 
> already done so.
>
> In terms of the doc you referenced, I assume you got that from the User 
> Guide, it does seem confusing, please log a bug for this.  The API doc 
> seems more clear,
>
> http://www.eclipse.org/eclipselink/api/1.1.2/org/eclipse/persistence/config/PersistenceUnitProperties.html#CACHE_SHARED_ 
>
>
> http://www.eclipse.org/eclipselink/api/1.1.2/org/eclipse/persistence/config/CacheType.html