RE: [PEAR-DEV] Cache_Lite 1.0 ?

sorry, i can't seem to find the earlier discussion on http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=pear-dev&w=2&r=1&s=Cache_Lite&q=b can you point me to it? In the meanwhile, let me ask another question. If Cache_Lite provides file based caching, and Cache provides file based caching, and Cache_Lite is truly 4x faster, why not replace Cache's file based container with Cache_Lite's container? I mean if including PEAR.php dynamically only when necessary is a good thing for Cache_Lite, isn't it a good thing for Cache as well? I am relatively new to the PEAR world, but I am having trouble understanding the arguments. (In my mind, Cache_Lite provides a subset of functionality provided by Cache. The implementation of that subset apparently is better than the implementation provided in Cache. Why not improve Cache and Cache_Lite by sharing the implementation?) dave -----Original Message----- From: Fabien MARTY [mailto:fabien.marty@free.fr] Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 2:00 PM To: Jon Wood; dviner@yahoo-inc.com Cc: pear-dev@lists.php.net Subject: Re: [PEAR-DEV] Cache_Lite 1.0 ? Le mar 05/11/2002 à 22:40, Jon Wood a écrit : > You choose what features you need... if you just need basic file system > based caching, then you go for cache_lite - if you need more features, then > use cache. I will add that Cache_Lite is 4 times faster than Cache (bench on my computer only). And it's completly protected against cache corruption (writing and reading at the same time). So it's designed for high traffic site (tested successfully with two web sites of 600000 pages a day). On the other hand, it's less flexible than Cache (Cache_Lite use only file container) and it's true that there is less features. So you have a choice. > Although it's a valid comment - could we merge the two so that they're > backend drivers for one cache implementation, or are the APIs signifigantly > different... I havn't used them before. The API is not really different. But a merge is not possible because Cache_Lite use ONLY a file container (for speed). Moreover, PEAR.php is included dynamically (include_once) only when an error is detected. So in the most of cases, PEAR.php isn't included (which allow a big jump of perfs). So there is a choice. BTW it has been already discussed on this list :-) Fab