I have not used T5 yet, but would @Cached use the file system for caching HTML fragments similiar to caching mechanisms in some php frameworks?
Or is this a pure memory-based cache? I am thinking about migrating an old PHP application to T5 - it has really a lot of traffic and any users are logged in at the same time. It is quite a low-level application that is still quite fast due to cron jobs in the background that generate HTML fragments that are included to reduce the database-query bottleneck (e.g. grouping/ordering and sorting of huge tables). Somehow I don't trust Hibernate for high-performance database queries on huge tables .... as I think if tables are huge and many people access it, it will always lead to problems...no matter how good the queries are and how well you have splitted the data across several tables. So I think the best solution is always to generate HTML fragments in the background that take a long time and simple "include" them....this is even quicker then parsing templates when the data is cached. So you save the time necessary for querying the database plus the time necessary for processing the templates that are involved. Currently the setup on this application uses one-way database replication and the cron jobs access the the huge data table on the replicated database and generate those HTML fragments without disturbing the web-applications performance. So the main application simply includes those HTML fragments within milliseconds. But maybe the T5 caching mechanism would make all of those low-level tricks redundant? --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
