Skip to content
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

Board Review: Caching responses in track 2 data-plane clients #3293

Closed
srnagar opened this issue Aug 27, 2021 · 3 comments
Closed

Board Review: Caching responses in track 2 data-plane clients #3293

srnagar opened this issue Aug 27, 2021 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels
architecture board-review Request for an Architectural Board Review

Comments

@srnagar
Copy link
Member

srnagar commented Aug 27, 2021

Contacts and Timeline

  • Service team responsible for the client library: ADP
  • Main contacts: @srnagar

About the Client Library

  • Name of client library: General design guidelines for caching that applies to all track 2 data-plane clients

We want to discuss the design guidelines for creating a client that can potentially cache certain types of responses. In this review, we'd like to cover the following topics:

  • Should the client be stateful and cache responses?
  • If the client supports caching, should it be a separate client type?
  • Return type for APIs that can return cached responses
  • Cache eviction policy
  • Max cache size

More details and various options are outlined in this gist - https://gist.github.com/srnagar/7ad722535ab2cb01a5160de551aab818

Example

Schema Registry service is a concrete example where the schema is immutable once created. So, if the client gets the schema from the service, it is safe to cache it on the client. The schema is used to deserialize every event from Event Hubs and making a service call to get the schema for every event received is not optimal.

@srnagar srnagar added architecture board-review Request for an Architectural Board Review labels Aug 27, 2021
@kyle-patterson
Copy link
Member

Scheduled for 9/8

@tg-msft
Copy link
Member

tg-msft commented Sep 8, 2021

Recording[MS INTERNAL ONLY]

@srnagar
Copy link
Member Author

srnagar commented Sep 20, 2021

No further action is required. Closing this issue.

@srnagar srnagar closed this as completed Sep 20, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
architecture board-review Request for an Architectural Board Review
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants