Re: Conf cache

On 28 Feb 2005 at 17:30, Manuel Holtgrewe wrote:

> [email protected] schrieb:
> > Hi all,
<snip>
> 
> We have a cache directory in a built workspace: $BUILT/tmp/cache.

Thanks. I know now.

> > I see no use for a level_flag since a workspace has a name and we must 
> > distinguish between workspaces in the database. Correct ?
> 
> Above you propose to have one for factory defaults and another for other 
> settings - it would be more elegant to have levels - eh?

No. Levels are elegant. I'm proposing a level_table in stead of a 
level_field for the implementation of this elegant feature.
I expressed my flavour too. But I see you prefer a field or flag.
No harm done.

> > Or is BC such that more than one workspace is not allowed?
>  > Or should any workspace use a different database ?
> 
> We agreed on IRC that we want one configuration database for each built 
> workspace.

I see now. I didn't know.
So, there is one workspace and beneath that one develops packages.
That's the structure, right?

Forget the previous email than.

> > Now. the caching. Assume that caching is running ok.
> > This could be made intelligent, caching all on the fly.
> > Somebody changes some conf_values and wants to flush the cache.
> > So the caching starts freshly.
> > 
> > The point now is, what should be flushed? I mean, which cache?
> 
> I think we talked that over some ten mails before. I proposed Smarty 
> like caching parameters and Jcm proposed simply "no cache" and "cache" 
> for development/production.

Having only one workspace makes my question superfluous.
It *never* was clear to me, but it is now.

Thanks for handing over the information.

wim niemans


_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev-PnctHDZWAvB/Cz2I37pSEPZ4XP/[email protected]
http://lists.binarycloud.com/mailman/listinfo/dev