[TYPO3-dev] Drop no_cache

[ries van Twisk]

On Mar 5, 2008, at 7:20 AM, Francois Suter wrote:

> Hi,
>
>> Sound like a good idea BUT extension devs who are interested in the
>> concept of TYPO3 and its API know how to do things
>
> I disagree. I try to use TYPO3's cache as well as possible in my
> extensions, but following discussions such as this one I am in doubt
> whether I really do things right or not. I would very much  
> appreciate an
> article as clear as "The mysteries of cHash" about the of cache or not
> is one's plugin. I think that would definitely promote best practices.
>
> Cheers
>
> -- 
>
> Francois Suter
> Cobweb Development Sarl - http://www.cobweb.ch

I agree with Francois, it's really not easy to understand all
the concepts of TYPO3's caching and it's consequences.

Once I made a extension that was ajax enabled, but for google and non  
ajax clients
it could follow links on a page so users could see it and google could  
index it.
It turned out then when I had 10 articles on a page, each page was
cached 11 times. if you have a site that runs in the thousands of pages,
it turned out that the cache of TYPO3 grows rapidly gigabytes in  
matter of days,
not to mention that google made a denial of service because TYPO3's
page generation is so slow at was a popular site with quite some  
dynamic content aswell.

I didn't understand that TYPO3 did cache the whole page, I was  
thinking it would cache
a change only. This was in my eurly days......

The mysteries of chash are still a bit of a mistery for most people,  
and I simply
advice people who want's to build extensions to start using USER_INT.  
Because
the next question I get of they use USER
'How do I get rid of the ugly chash in the link??....and I have to  
agree with them, it is ugly...)


I believe that Elmar wrote a much better article one day then Kaspers  
article,
don't know the link though.

For the feature I hope that V5 will have a much faster core engine  
then V4,
so we don't have to worry so much about slowness because to be honest,
generating a single page in 500ms even on decent hardware is awefully  
slow.
For most extension we simply talk about database retrieval, fill it in  
into some template
and send it to core, shouldn't take to long....

just my 2 cents

Ries