Re: Where to Cache "per user" Data That Can Get Updated By Admins
From: Brad Roberts (BradRoberts_at_discussions.microsoft.com)
Date: 08/24/04
- Next message: Shiva: "Re: C# - How to replace question mark with any character"
- Previous message: Stephanie_Stowe_at_IDX.COM: "Re: Browser Close ...."
- In reply to: Patrice: "Re: Where to Cache "per user" Data That Can Get Updated By Admins"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 05:27:01 -0700
What about putting " " in the span instead of text?
"Patrice" wrote:
> More precisely I wanted to stress that IMO those data shouldn't be updated
> "directly" in the "user store" (even a cache). Instead changes should be
> "posted" to the database and the control flow of the user page should take
> care of reloading those data in the (expired) cache.
>
> Anyway from a non technical point of view, I would still consider to take
> these changes into account the next time the user logs. In particular it
> could be quite annoying for users to see options appearing or disappearing
> while they are working especially if the admin performs multiple changes (in
> which case using the session is enough).
>
> If for some reason you want to take this change immediately into account,
> you'll have just to expire the cache and the user control flow will take
> care of loading new data into the cache...
>
> Patrice
>
> --
>
> "Guadala Harry" <GMan@NoSpam.com> a écrit dans le message de
> news:OXzhRlbiEHA.1348@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> > Patrice,
> >
> > Thanks for the response.
> >
> > FWIW: rather unusual requirements happen all the time (that's why they pay
> > us the big bucks! - right!?)... and their presence and associated unusual
> > solutions don't necessarily imply that anything is being done improperly.
> > While I was somewhat vague in my OP, think about an app with security: an
> > admin can go in and modifies per-user permissions on something while users
> > are logged in. I currently have a security "gate keeper" class that will
> > ultimately provide up-to-the-nonosecond security - making the cached data
> > not so critical. But I'd like to make the user's experience a bit easier
> in
> > the case of such an unlikely scenario in which a user logs on and can
> access
> > something, and while the user is logged in, and admin comes in and changes
> > permissions on what that user can access. I'm just going the extra mile
> and
> > modifying what the user can see (which is cached as described in the OP)
> > before they get blocked by the security class. Just trynig to make the
> > user's experience a bit easier. I hope this makes sense.
> >
> > Cheers!
> >
> >
> > "Patrice" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> > news:eBCUPMbiEHA.3928@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> > > Yes (won't matter anyway if you shield this implementation detail from
> > your
> > > app by using an intermediate class). That said the requirement of having
> > > those data updated by an admin while users are offline is reather
> unusual.
> > > Is it really impossible to have this handled properly (you shouldn't
> store
> > > data in the cache when they are not needed, it shouldn't be updated
> > > directly).
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Patrice
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > "Guadala Harry" <GMan@NoSpam.com> a écrit dans le message de
> > > news:erG8DCbiEHA.3612@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> > > > Is there any way for one Session to remove and update objects in
> another
> > > > Session? I seriously doubt it, but thought I'd ask. Here's why: I have
> > > some
> > > > data that is unique per user (or per session - similar to "welcome
> back,
> > > > Jim" after Jim logs in) and consumed across multiple pages. This "per
> > > user"
> > > > data lives in a database, so toward improving runtime performance I
> want
> > > to
> > > > cache data supporting this and similar per user features. Because the
> > data
> > > > changes per user, output caching the page is out (at least I don't
> want
> > to
> > > > cache per Custom right now). So, I'm looking at storing this per-user
> > data
> > > > in either the Cache object or in Session state.
> > > >
> > > > I think Session state would normally be the obvious choice - however -
> > one
> > > > more important consideration that throws a wrench into that
> conventional
> > > > wisdom is that I need to let administrators of this application modify
> > > this
> > > > "per user" data - perhaps while users are online... so if the data is
> > > stored
> > > > in session, then the user would not get the new data until they
> > establish
> > > a
> > > > new session... so now storing this data in the Cache seems to make
> sense
> > > > because it's relatively easy for any session to remove/update data in
> > the
> > > > Cache.
> > > >
> > > > So, given the requirements as described (and my somewhat limited
> > knowledge
> > > > of ASP.NET), am I correct to conclude that this data should go into
> the
> > > > Cache and not Session? Are there alternatives to Cache and Session
> that
> > > > would make sense for this scenario?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks!
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>
- Next message: Shiva: "Re: C# - How to replace question mark with any character"
- Previous message: Stephanie_Stowe_at_IDX.COM: "Re: Browser Close ...."
- In reply to: Patrice: "Re: Where to Cache "per user" Data That Can Get Updated By Admins"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
