-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 67
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
DOC Document changes to caching #543
DOC Document changes to caching #543
Conversation
fef3baa
to
ae9c18b
Compare
[configured](/developer_guides/performance/caching/). | ||
shared between multiple server instances. | ||
|
||
No in-memory cache is used by default. We strongly recommend [configuring an in-memory cache](/developer_guides/performance/caching/#adapters) such as Redis or Memcached. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
No in-memory cache is used by default. We strongly recommend [configuring an in-memory cache](/developer_guides/performance/caching/#adapters) such as Redis or Memcached. | |
No in-memory cache is used by default. To improve performance on larger applications we recommend [configuring an in-memory cache](/developer_guides/performance/caching/#adapters) such as Redis or Memcached. |
It's a performance optimisation, it's not the end of the world if this isn't done.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's not the end of the world, but it should still be a strong recommendation. People can choose not to do it, but generally they should do it.
It's also not just for larger applications - it will always be an improvement for any size project.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The problem here is that this by saying this something your really should do, it's essentially adding an extra barrier to adoption of Silverstripe for new projects. We want encourage people to get up and running as easily as possible, not burden them with extra things they need to do.
A lot of people also have very little control over their server environment. By making redis/memcached a "strong recommendation" then we're kind of saying that Silverstripe is perhaps not an appropriate choice for them, which simply is not the case. Silverstripe works just fine without either of those.
Maybe don't mention "larger applications" though this at the end of the day redis/memcached is a performance optimisation and not a requirement for running Silverstripe
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Fair enough, will make the change - but I'll leave out the "on larger applications" part.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Done
ae9c18b
to
0f8525d
Compare
0f8525d
to
1b18251
Compare
Issue