Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
laziness, impatience, and hubris
 
PerlMonks  

Re: OT: Preserving Information

by Abigail-II (Bishop)
on Oct 08, 2002 at 16:43 UTC ( #203689=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re: Re: OT: Preserving Information
in thread OT: Preserving Information

I don't have a problem with a pure cache - one that will check whether information is stale before serving it. But caches that don't check the backend are a gray area. Personally, I don't have a problem with them, as long as they have a reasonable expiration period (that is, if the backend data is removed or modified, the cache should reflect that after a not-to-long period). But if a cache doesn't expire documents that have disappeared, or where the expire period is unreasonably large I think they are wrong. It might have legal problems as well.

Abigail


Comment on Re: OT: Preserving Information
Re: Re: OT: Preserving Information
by Dog and Pony (Priest) on Oct 09, 2002 at 07:35 UTC
    I don't know how long Google keeps their cache, I can't find that information, but I know that I've upon occassion found sites that were gone (by some time) via their cache instead. Supposedly I guess that the cache would disappear when the site is no longer indexed, ie due to disappearance, but that is a tough one - a site might be down, when do they consider it gone? OTOH, any site owner may request that Google does not cache their site, which is somthing like an opt-out solution then I guess.

    By your definition, I guess theirs is a grey area then.


    You have moved into a dark place.
    It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://203689]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others musing on the Monastery: (5)
As of 2014-08-01 00:57 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    My favorite superfluous repetitious redundant duplicative phrase is:









    Results (256 votes), past polls