Re: Re: Would like to take over Cache Lite

On Fri, 2009-01-23 at 10:03 -0800, Joe Stump wrote: > On Jan 23, 2009, at 5:26 AM, Igor Feghali wrote: > > >> Cache is kinda .. dead I think - And most people i know think it > >> has a > >> weird design :-) > >> Perhaps a new package is in order, Cache_Lite_Memcache that is API > >> compatible or even just a new package with completely new design and > >> approach to things. > >> > >> Perhaps Cache2 can be started ? Just thinking out loud now. > > > > Strong +1 for a totally new package. > > I would go with the name "Cache_Memcache", plus I would suggest to > > deprecate Cache in favor of it. > > So, at Digg, we have a whole Cache framework that includes a standard > interface for Memcached and APC. It's container-based, much like MDB2/ > DB drivers. It also includes a "Local" cache (just a global array, > basically) so the same request doesn't fetch a cached object more than > once in a request along with a "Chain" driver that uses the chain of > responsibility pattern (e.g. Is it in Local? No? APC? No? Is it in > Memcached? Yes? Go and set it in APC and Local and then return it). > > It also has faux multi-get for the containers that don't support it, > etc. It, roughly, follows the Memcache interface from PHP and has some > other syntactical sugar (e.g. $cache->my_key_name to get()). > > It wouldn't be terribly difficult to decouple this from our internal > code. Let me see if I can sucker a few of my Diggers into refactoring > and releasing it. That would be awesome. We've written a memcache class at silverorange that adds syntactical sugar and cache namespaces. It would be great to use a more comprehensive PEAR package instead. I look forward to reviewing the proposal! Cheers, Mike