4 ms·
That.. sort of supports my argument :-) He could cache it indefinitely instead of 30 days if he's going to invalidate the cache anyway.
by skrebbel 9y ago
That.. sort of supports my argument :-) He could cache it indefinitely instead of 30 days if he's going to invalidate the cache anyway.
- Bedon292 9y agoI do appear to have misinterpreted what your point was. Sorry about that. Although I assume the idea was limiting how much is cached at any point on their part. Not sure it really matters though its not that much data.