ehcache vs default caching

Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2015 3:05 pm

ehcache vs default caching

Postby klowery » Wed Apr 22, 2015 3:17 pm

Until this point we've used the default caching mechanism. I assume this always keeps the device definitions in memory.

What is the advantage to switching to ehcache?

Also, I've seen the Spring example for this. Is it possible to use ehcache with wurfl without the spring framework?

Thanks for your help!


Posts: 38
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 10:27 am

Re: ehcache vs default caching

Postby fulvio.crivellaro » Tue May 05, 2015 5:59 am

Hello Kevin

Actually, there is no advantage switching to Ehcache.
The reason there still exists a Ehcache option in WURFL is for backward compatibility, but since version 1.4 the WURFL API comes with a default cache which leverages a better knowledge of the API, and performs much better, optimizing both the hit rate and the memory footprint.


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest