Toplink cache growing until OutOfMemoryError

Hello,
We are using OC4J 9.0.3 with toplink 9.0.3 on IBM AIX J2RE 1.3.1. From time to time, the JVM crashes with an OutOfMemoryError. Analysing the JVM heap dump, we have found that there are a lot of objects of the same type in the toplink cache:
# of objects: 48 047
Total size in bytes: 165 874 992
The identity map settings for the project caching this object type are:
Type: SoftCacheWeakIdentityMap
Size: 100
My understanding is that most of the 48 047 objects should be referenced as a weak references and that some of them should have been garbage collected by the VM instead of throwing an OutOfMemoryError.
Could it be a problem in the JVM garbage collector ?
May I use a CacheIdentityMap to work around the problem ?
Do you have any advice ?
Thank you in advance for any hint,
Pierre Laroche

Being in production I am not sure how much you can debug the system, but to determine if it is an issue with the weak references you could clear out the cache through an initializeAllIdentityMaps call on the session when the system is using most of the memory? This will remove all objects from the TopLink identity map removing the WeakReferences. This call should not be completed on a system still servicing requests though. Is it possible that there is a leak in the application that is preventing the WeakReferences from being garbage collected?
--Gordon                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       

Similar Messages

  • Toplink cache

    Hi,
    I am having severe memory problems using Toplink Essentials. What I am experiencing is a growing memory consumption every time an entity is persistent, no matter I set in persistence.xml
    <property name="toplink.cache.type.default" value="Weak"/>
    and
    <property name="toplink.cache.size.default" value="10"/>
    I used the Java Visual VM supplied with the sun 1.6.0.07 sdk to analize the heap.
    The behaviour I am expecting is:
    when a persistent class is not referenced by my application anymore, it should be kept in the toplink cache with a weak reference, to be garbage collected as soon as the JVM is running out of memory.
    What I see instead :
    for each class I persist I find roughly 3 instances in memory and they seems to be strongly referenced. In addition, after a while the program start slowing down (each persist takes longer, I guess this is the cost for the cache lookup, but in my real application it ends up using more than a second for each persist!)
    Workaround: I found EntityManage.clear() wipes out the cache freeying the memory, but I am not sure this is free from side effects (all the entities are detached I guess)
    I attacked a test case: just the simplest entity possible, filled with a random integer and persisted. Leave it running for maybe 10 minutes.
    After a while have:
    2000 entities persisted
    6000 instances in the heap
    12000 oracle.toplink.essentials.internal.helperIdentityHashtable$Entry
    Persisting is now taking ~50ms instead of 5ms (and growing)
    Am I doing something wrong?
    This is my entity:
    import javax.persistence.Column;
    import javax.persistence.Entity;
    import javax.persistence.GeneratedValue;
    import javax.persistence.GenerationType;
    import javax.persistence.Id;
    @Entity
    public class AnEntity {
         @Id
         @GeneratedValue(strategy = GenerationType.IDENTITY)
         @Column
         protected int     anEntityID;
         protected int     data;
         protected AnEntity() {
         public AnEntity(final int data) {
              this.data = data;
    My main application:
    import javax.persistence.EntityManager;
    import javax.persistence.EntityManagerFactory;
    import javax.persistence.EntityTransaction;
    import javax.persistence.Persistence;
    public class Test {
         public static void main(final String[] args) throws InterruptedException {
              new Test();
         final EntityManagerFactory     emFTest     = Persistence.createEntityManagerFactory("test_pu");
         private final EntityManager     emTest     = emFTest.createEntityManager();
         public Test() throws InterruptedException {
              int i = 0;
              while (true) {
                   final AnEntity entity = new AnEntity((int) (Math.random() * 1000000));
                   final long time = System.nanoTime();
                   try {
                        final EntityTransaction trans = emTest.getTransaction();
                        trans.begin();
                        emTest.persist(entity);
                        trans.commit();
                   } catch (final Exception e) {
                        System.err.println(e.getMessage());
                   System.out.println("It took:" + (System.nanoTime() - time) / 1000000 + "ms for " + i);
                   i++;
                   Thread.sleep(100);
    And my persistence.xml
    <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
    <persistence version="1.0" xmlns="http://java.sun.com/xml/ns/persistence">
              <persistence-unit name="test_pu" transaction-type="RESOURCE_LOCAL">
                        <provider>oracle.toplink.essentials.ejb.cmp3.EntityManagerFactoryProvider</provider>
                        <class>AnEntity</class>
                        <properties>
                             <property name="toplink.jdbc.driver" value="com.mysql.jdbc.Driver" />
                             <property name="toplink.jdbc.url" value="jdbc:mysql://test:3306/test" />
                             <property name="toplink.jdbc.user" value="test" />
                             <property name="toplink.jdbc.password" value="test" />
                             <property name="toplink.logging.level" value="INFO" />
                             <property name="toplink.ddl-generation" value="create-tables" />
                             <property name="toplink.cache.type.default" value="Weak"/>
                        </properties>
              </persistence-unit>
    </persistence>

    Hi Chris,
    I see your point, and this is what I am trying to obtain, I am sure i am getting the underlying JPA phylosophy wrong (as a side note, I already moved to Eclipselink :) )
    What I have is a fleet of vehicles, each one sending the gps position once per second. All the position are stored in the database.
    The communication between each veichle and the "server application" is through JMS, so I effectively receive a bunch of positions every second - no easy way to put them in the same transaction, but it is not a big hit on the database so I am not concerned about this.
    What I noticed is after something like 30 minutes the application starts struggling, every persist took 300ms, positions started accumulating as he software did not manage to write them as fast as they are generated and everything start collapsing badly - it took 15 days to find out the problem was with the toplink cache.
    I am trying to work out the best way of doing things.
    What I noticed is, if I recreate the EM, all the entities are detached (and I understand why - entities are managed by the entity manager!).
    I understand there are two caches, the session cache and the UoW cache (EM).
    What I desire at a conceptual level is to keep my entities managed until I do not reference them anymore. If I need them again, I have to retrieve them back with em.find, or I can create new ones.
    Unfortunately things seems not to be working this way - EM keep everything in cache even if do not have any reference to an instance.
    I have quite a good level of control over the global cache, but no control at all over the EM cache (apart from completely wiping it) so I have to recreate the EM every time, but the object are not managed this way - forcing me to use merge in place of persist (I basically would like the best of the two worlds).
    This is not a problem by itself, but this forces me to write code like
    entity=em.merge(entity)
    or better:
    AnEntity tmp=em.merge(entity)
    entity.anEntityID=tmp.anEntityID
    to handle the case this is a new entity. This is my new code, everytime I have to update the db
    final EntityManager emTest = emFTest.createEntityManager();
    final EntityTransaction trans = emTest.getTransaction();
    trans.begin();
    final AnEntity tmp = emTest.merge(entity);
    trans.commit();
    entity.anEntityID = tmp.anEntityID;
    emTest.close()
    while with a global EM it was:
    final EntityTransaction trans = emTest.getTransaction();
    trans.begin();
    emTest.persist(entity);
    trans.commit();

  • TopLink Cache Out of Sync

    I have a situation where the application needs to handle inserts and updates, and deletes are handled by an oracle stored procedure on the database. My problem is after issuing any inserts/updates, then doing a delete of a record, it seems like that record is still in the toplink cache because trying to re-insert that deleted record fails until I restart the app server, then it works fine (until it's deleted again). Is there some way after calling the stored procedure to delete a record, to get the object in toplink updated correctly?
    I've tried a few different things including
    getUnitOfWork().unregisterObject(object);
    and
    getSession().getIdentityMapAccessor().invalidateObject(getObject(object));
    with no luck. Any suggestions?
    Nick

    You can set check existence to be check database instead of check cache.
    http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/ias/toplink/doc/1013/main/_html/uowadv001.htm#CACFHAAJ

  • Toplink cache performance

    I have the following problem:
    A j2ee struts application deployed over a cluster of 4 application server (10g). Machines Sun Solaris, configured identically with one OC4J container and three processes(3 jvm's). Memory always keeps growing till the max configured in the java options. Which is set to 1,5 Gb (we have tried with a lower Xmx1GB and even Xmx2GB)...
    Once that number is hit than the CPU turns high, and the controller ping process of the application server forcefully terminates the process(es) which can not be reached by the ping process.
    Load: approximately 1500 users per day, with high degree of updates and inserts.
    My question: can the toplink cache,(most of the classes are configured SoftCacheWeakReference) be the cause of this ridiculous memory growth?

    Seems like your application has a memory leak somewhere. You may wish to analyze your app servers memory usage with memory profiling tools, such as JProbe memory profiler.
    Unless you have a very large cache size, I would not expect the SoftCacheWeakIdentityMap to cause a memory issue. You can verify this by changing your caching type to WeakIdentityMap. Also double check that you are not using a FullIdentityMap anywhere, nor using a very large cache size.
    Also verify your application does not holding references to objects and not allowing them to garbage collect.

  • How to Add Index in Toplink Cache

    Hi
    We are using toplink as ORM.we are using default cache option (soft cache weak identity)provided by toplink, need to optimize the object retrival from cache, is there any option to create Index ( like database index) on the toplink cache.
    Message was edited by:
    [email protected]

    The TopLink cache is indexed by primary key only. It does not support additional indexes.
    Doug

  • Querying the toplink cache under high-load

    We've had some interesting experiences with "querying" the TopLink Cache lately.
    It was recently discovered that our "read a single object" method was incorrectly
    setting query.checkCacheThenDB() for all ReadObjectQueries. This was brought to light
    when we upgraded our production servers from 4 cores to 8. We immediatly started
    experiencing very long response times under load.
    We traced this down to the following stack: (TopLink version 10.1.3.1.0)
    at java.lang.Object.wait(Native Method)
    - waiting on <0x00002aab08fd26d8> (a oracle.toplink.internal.helper.ConcurrencyManager)
    at java.lang.Object.wait(Object.java:474)
    at oracle.toplink.internal.helper.ConcurrencyManager.acquireReadLock(ConcurrencyManager.java:179)
    - locked <0x00002aab08fd26d8> (a oracle.toplink.internal.helper.ConcurrencyManager)
    at oracle.toplink.internal.helper.ConcurrencyManager.checkReadLock(ConcurrencyManager.java:167)
    at oracle.toplink.internal.identitymaps.CacheKey.checkReadLock(CacheKey.java:122)
    at oracle.toplink.internal.identitymaps.IdentityMapKeyEnumeration.nextElement(IdentityMapKeyEnumeration.java:31)
    at oracle.toplink.internal.identitymaps.IdentityMapManager.getFromIdentityMap(IdentityMapManager.java:530)
    at oracle.toplink.internal.queryframework.ExpressionQueryMechanism.checkCacheForObject(ExpressionQueryMechanism.java:412)
    at oracle.toplink.queryframework.ReadObjectQuery.checkEarlyReturnImpl(ReadObjectQuery.java:223)
    at oracle.toplink.queryframework.ObjectLevelReadQuery.checkEarlyReturn(ObjectLevelReadQuery.java:504)
    at oracle.toplink.queryframework.DatabaseQuery.execute(DatabaseQuery.java:564)
    at oracle.toplink.queryframework.ObjectLevelReadQuery.execute(ObjectLevelReadQuery.java:779)
    at oracle.toplink.queryframework.ReadObjectQuery.execute(ReadObjectQuery.java:388)
    We moved the query back to the default, query.checkByPrimaryKey() and this issue went away.
    The bottleneck seemed to stem from the read lock on the CacheKey from IdenityMapKeyEnumeration
    public Object nextElement() {
    if (this.nextKey == null) {
    throw new NoSuchElementException("IdentityMapKeyEnumeration nextElement");
    // CR#... Must check the read lock to avoid
    // returning half built objects.
    this.nextKey.checkReadLock();
    return this.nextKey;
    We had many threads that were having contention while searching the cache for a particular query.
    From the stack we know that the contention was limited to one class. We've since refactored that code
    not to use a query in that code path.
    Question:
    Armed with this better knowledge of how TopLink queries the cache, we do have a few objects that we
    frequently read by something other than the primary key. A natural key, but not the oid.
    We have some other caching mechanisms in place (JBoss TreeCache) to help eliminate queries to the DB
    for these objects. But the TreeCache also tries to acquire a read lock when accessing the cache.
    Presumably a read lock over the network to the cluster.
    Is there anything that can be done about the read lock on CacheKey when querying the cache in a high load
    situation?

    CheckCacheThenDatabase will check the entire cache for a match using a linear search. This can be efficient if the cache is very large. Typically it is more efficient to access the database if your cache is large and the field you are querying in the database is indexed in the table.
    The cache concurrency was greatly improved in TopLink 11g/EclipseLink, so you may wish to try it out.
    Supporting indexes in the TopLink/EclipseLink cache is something desirable (feel free to log the enhancement request on EclipseLink). You can simulate this to some degree using a named query and a query cache.
    -- James : http://www.eclipselink.org

  • Refresh toplink cache from tirgger

    How to update the toplink cache due to change in the database by some external process or procedure?
    This question was posted some time back and one of the suggestion was to create a trigger on the table holding the data and implement callout to the toplink cache to refresh. I will appreciate if any one can let me know where I can I find more information to implement such a callout method from trigger on the database table.
    We are accessing the toplink objects from OC4J container from where a singleton is managing the calls to the toplink objects. We already have methods in place to refresh the cached object based on timeouts but now the new requirements are to refresh the objects only if the data is changed in the database.
    Thanks
    Ahmad

    I have url error on this thread : How to refresh cache in TopLink, turn off cache
    [b]Discussion Forums Error
    We cannot process your request at this time. Please try again later.
    Thank's

  • Toplink Caching issue

    I have three Entities say C1 , P1 and card. Relation between these
    entities are like this
    P1 to Card ( one - one mapping )
    C1 to Card ( one - many mapping )
    I have three usecases. Usecase 1 uses the mail Entity C1. It will
    create one record using C1. ( keep in mind that there will not be any data for entity card at that time ).
    Second usecase , Usecase 2 , uses Entity P1 and creates data in P1 as
    well as Card.
    Third usecase will again take C1 and try to get the card data which
    were inserted through P1.
    But unfortunately , it is coming as null ... But if I restart the server and access the third usecase then I'm getting all the card data from C1 Entity which were saved through P1 Entity .
    To summarise my finding , issue is with Toplink caching. When i
    accessed the first usecase, C1 is cached. In the second usecase , I updated Entity card using P1. When i accessed the third usecase , toplink is returing the cached entity. Toplink is not able to identify whether related entity got changed or not....
    Workaround is not to use cache for C1 entity. It is working but it will
    not be the correct solution.
    any one faced this issue in Toplink ?
    Correct me if my findings are not correct...

    Hello,
    Its not that the cache isn't working, its that you are updating relationships in the database but not in the cache. Take the case of a 1:M from B->C used in a previous response. It looks like the foreign key used in this relationship (in the C table) is mapped to the C object either as a direct to field mapping, or through a 1:1 to the A object. When you change this so that it now somehow points to the B object, you haven't updated the B object to include the C in its collection. Because B has a 1:M mapping collection of Cs, when you next get that B object from the cache, its collection will not contain the newly referenced C (assuming indirection is not used or has been previously triggered). This is a result of you mapping the 1:M in the first place - since it is storing the collection in the object.
    If you are going to make changes that affect relationships and yet not update the relationships directly I would suggest either:
    A) refreshing affected objects from the database when done. In this case, refreshing the B object will result in TopLink requerying the B->C relation and picking up any changes (depending on your refresh options on the B descriptor though - please check the docs if you need more info).
    B) Not mapping these relationships. Instead, when you need to find C objects referenced from B, query for them.
    Both options are less efficient as they cause more hits to the database. This is why it would be preferred if you updated the relationships when you change fields that affect those relationships, but it is up to you to decide which will work best for your application.
    Please note that the cache is working, in fact the situation you are seeing is due to it working. I am not sure of how your situation would work with DAO as you mentioned in a previous post, but it sounds like it would always hit the database. This situation is a result of you making changes in the database but not changing the object model to reflect those changes, proving that the cache is indeed working. While you mention that some objects are not in your use case, they are in the database but just not mapped in TopLink. In the case of a 1:M mapping, the database shows a 1:1 back relationship that you have not mapped in your object model. So this would be more a case of your object model not matching your database model, and not being taken into account in your use cases.
    Best Regards,
    Chris

  • How do I sync Toplink Cache with my Database?

    Hey guys,
    We are running macro's through an excel sheet that connects to the database and performs Updates and Inserts.
    Since this database update is NOT taking place through TopLink (in a Unit of Work) - we do not see the database changes through the web app on the front end unless we bounce our webserver. Presumably the Toplink cache is re-built on start up...so then we can see the changes.
    My question is, what can I do to make sure the TopLink cache is aware of the database changes we have made through the macro without having to bounce the server? Is there a re-fresh or sync command that can be run?
    This task is sort of a one time thing, so I don't want a solution that involves the cache going to sync itself on a schedule or anything like that. Maybe bouncing is the best solution?
    Thoughts?
    We are using Toplink 9.0.4
    Thanks.

    Hello,
    Because it is a one time thing, if you can make sure no other TopLink process are going on, you can probably get away with initializeAllIdentityMaps() or the intitializeIdentityMap(Class) methods on the session. These will clear the identity maps, having the obvious draw back of removing all object identity which will cause problems with running processes though. It might be better than bouncing the server - it depends on the application. Logging out of the session and logging back in has the same effect of clearing the cache, but with a bit more overhead. Benifit is that running processes will get errors if they continue to use the session, rather than strange behaviior if they continue to use objects after identity is lost.
    Another alternative is to run refresh queries on the data you know might be in the cache or that might have been affected. Drawbacks are that this brings them into the cache if they are not already there.
    TopLink 9.0.4 is a quire a few versions back, and in newer versions there is cache invalidation. An object marked as invalid is not removed, so object identity is maintained, but on the next query the data will be refreshed - ensuring subsequent queries will get results from the database without having to be told explicietly to refresh or being set to always refresh. Invalidation can be triggered on particular objects, classes or the entire cache or different policies can be set to set a time to live etc.
    Except for bouncing the server or logging out of the session, all of the above leave some possibility that a concurrent user will still have a reference to stale data and continue to use it after the process has run on the database. So I hope you use optimistic locking and that your batch process updates the version to avoid other process from overwriting with stale data.
    Best Regards,
    Chris

  • Querying by PK against Toplink Cache

    Lets say I have table A that has PK id.
    If toplink generates SQL like this:
    "select id from A where 1=1 and id=3"
    Assuming the data is already cached against that PK, will Toplink retrieve the data from the Toplink cache with this SQL? or since i used 1=1, will it not find it in the cache and require a database retrieval?
    Thanks,
    Zev.

    Doug, thanks for the response. I expected it since we have seen a large increase in SQL. Let me explain the reason for this and maybe you can point us in a better direction.
    We generate a Map of CriteriaValue Objects. The in our base object, we iterate over the map and based on the criteria, we build the appropriate expression.
    Here is the code for the iteration.
              CriterionValue criterionValueObj;
              selectionExpression = builder.prefixSQL("1=1");
              while (keyIterator.hasNext()) {
                   String key = (String) keyIterator.next();
                   criterionValueObj = (CriterionValue) criteriaHash.get(key);
                   selectionExpression = getExpression(builder, selectionExpression, criterionValueObj, key, firstTimeThroughLoop);
                   firstTimeThroughLoop = false;
    As you can see, we add a prefix of 1=1. The reason for this is that if this is the first time through the look, we need to say:
    ExpressionBuilder builder; //just showing the declaration type
    selection = builder.get(key).containsSubstring(value.toString());
    if it is the second time through (with conjunction)
    ExpressionBuilder builder; //just showing the declaration type
    selection = selection.and (builder.get(key).containsSubstring(value.toString()));
    so we need two seperate code blocks in this case. A tremendous code minimization in our base class is to say 1=1 AND then it is as if we are always accessing it the second time.
    Do you have any suggestions for us? I do not want modify the caching options programitically.
    Thanks,
    Zev.

  • Database Change Notification and TopLink Cache Invalidation

    Has someone succeeed in implementing the How-to Database Change Notification and TopLink Cache Invalidation.
    I have corrected some document errata about the pl/sql content and I manage to have messages in the 'notify_queue'.
    I obtain the Topic in Java from this queue.
    But the TopicSuscriber instances do not receive any message. Is there something to have in mind to make it work ?
    Regards.

    Reviving this thread again...
    I am using DCN feature to build a middle-tier cache. I know oracle has problem sending physical rowid in case of 'Index Organized Table', however, in normal table also its not able to send proper rowid.
    e.g, I have 2 records in Table A with rowid AAARIUAAGAAAV/uABw and AAARIUAAGAAAV/pAAX.
    I have updated both the records. Strangely for the first record, oracle is sending INVALID rowid, although for the second record its sending the valid one.
    Following is the output:
    Row 1:  (Wrong rowid being sent, AAARIUAAGAAAV/uABw is replaced with AAARIUAAGAAAXDCAAr)
    Connection information  : local=localhost.localdomain/127.0.0.1:47633, remote=localhost.localdomain/127.0.0.1:2278
    Registration ID         : 2102
    Notification version    : 1
    Event type              : OBJCHANGE
    Database name           : <sid>
    Table Change Description (length=1)
        operation=[UPDATE], tableName=<table_name>, objectNumber=70164
        Row Change Description (length=1):
          ROW:  operation=UPDATE, ROWID=AAARIUAAGAAAXDCAAr
    Row 2:  (Right rowid being sent, AAARIUAAGAAAV/pAAX)
    Connection information  : local=localhost.localdomain/127.0.0.1:47633, remote=localhost.localdomain/127.0.0.1:2278
    Registration ID         : 2102
    Notification version    : 1
    Event type              : OBJCHANGE
    Database name           : <sid>
    Table Change Description (length=1)
        operation=[UPDATE], tableName=<table_name>, objectNumber=70164
        Row Change Description (length=1):
          ROW:  operation=UPDATE, ROWID=AAARIUAAGAAAV/pAAX
    Any idea ?

  • ValueHolder Indirection and TopLink Cache

    We have a parent object A (main table) and child object B (a lookup table), mapped thought ValueHolder Indirection.
    We use ReadAllQuery to build SQL and retrieve object A(s), and associated B(s).
    The query result is used to populate a web page table.
    The problem is that when the table is populated, the exact same lookup query against object B is repeated without checking cache. That data field is populated by object_A.object_b.description. For example, below same query would be repeated many times when loading up the web page table:
    Select description_id, description from Table_B where description_id = 1
    Why the query generated by this Indirection not checking cache? Anyway to force it to check TopLink cache first before querying against database?
    Thanks for any help!
    Jeffrey

    Thanks for the reply.
    We use JDeveloper 10.1.3.2. TopLink map in JDev is used to map all table objects and their relationships. So In TopLink map, object(table) A has a ValueHolder object(table) B through indirection. The primary key of B is: description_id, which is used in the table reference mapping.
    We use the default TopLink settings in JDev, so object B has below settings in TopLink map:
    Identity Map: FullIdentityMap
    Size: 50 (there are only about 20 records in this lookup table)
    Existence Checking: Check Cache
    We don't have any other caching mechanism other than TopLink's. EJB 3.0 is used as service bean, and External Transaction Controller (OC4J) is used.
    How to check if B is already in the TopLink cache? I heard ReadAllQuery always goes to database w/o checking TopLink cache, but in the case, the query generated by lazy loading indirection is after the ReadAllQuery execution (when the web page table is loading up).
    Jeffrey

  • Child Objects  and TopLink Cache

    All,
    I have a problem RE the TopLink cache:
    Object A has a Vector of Object Bs (1:M) and Object B has a Vector of Object Cs(1:M). I am using ValueHolderInterface and indirection pattern for each of these Vectors.
    When I update an Object C, it is not refreshed the next time I read Object A using the readObject(expression). I can see the changes in the database. Can someone tell me the best way to refresh the cache to get the updated Object Cs that belong to Object A.
    What I am doing is updating the C objects that belong to object A (thru Vector B) and then retrieving them again in the very next method call. Hope this makes sense!
    Thanks!
    J

    There is something wrong with your test case, I've seen this before -- if you update a C, then without fail the cached version of C is updated and if you have a handle to the cached A that has the B that has the C in question, then you will see the update. It sounds like perhaps you're not actually looking at the cached A, but instead looking at it from a UOW, etc.
    Send me an email, it's simply my firstname . lastname at Oracle.com. I'll send you a UOW primer that should help better understand these semantics...
    - Don

  • Cluster config. - toplink cache

    hi all!
    A simple question...
    I've built an application using ADF and toplink.
    Actually the application runs on a single IAS.
    now, for load reasons, i'll need to migrate to a cluster configuration.
    Is there any kind of problem with the toplink cache?
    Thanks.
    Luca

    hi all!
    A simple question...
    I've built an application using ADF and toplink.
    Actually the application runs on a single IAS.
    now, for load reasons, i'll need to migrate to a cluster configuration.
    Is there any kind of problem with the toplink cache?
    Thanks.
    Luca

  • Manually Refresh Toplink cache

    Gurus,
    Can we write some servlet which will alllow to manually refresh toplink cache, on click of button.
    Do we have to change any settings in session.xml or server.xml.
    Please point me in right direction.
    Thanks
    gbk

    There is no straight forward way of refreshing all the objects in the cache (short of looping through all the objects in the cache and manually refreshing them).
    The most common approach to this issue is to determine which queries need refreshing and refresh those.
    If this solution isn't what you were looking for, please provide more detail and I will be happy to help you further.
    Peter

Maybe you are looking for