https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=40554 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Druart <jonathan.druart@gmail.com> --- Created attachment 184894 --> https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/attachment.cgi?id=184894&action=edit Bug 40554: unsafe not used in set_in_cache -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. You are watching all bug changes.

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=40554 Jonathan Druart <jonathan.druart@gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |dcook@prosentient.com.au, | |lucas@bywatersolutions.com, | |m.de.rooy@rijksmuseum.nl, | |martin.renvoize@openfifth.c | |o.uk, | |nick@bywatersolutions.com, | |pedro.amorim@openfifth.co.u | |k, tomascohen@gmail.com Status|NEW |In Discussion --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Druart <jonathan.druart@gmail.com> --- I believe we can reduce the number of DB hits, particularly when retrieving authorised value descriptions within loops, by using our caching mechanism. Here are my suggestions: 1. Use a cache for single descriptions to avoid one DB fetch per description (see Koha::AuthorisedValues->find_description) 2. Replace ->search with ->find since we now have a unique constraint on (code, value).3. Remove the 5-second expiration in C4::Koha::GetAuthorisedValues. This seems to be a leftover from when we were less confident in our cache invalidation. 4. Use a dedicated namespace for authorised values. The trade-off here is that any modification to a value will clear the entire cache, but this should not be a frequent operation. Is it worth investing more time in this? Who supports this idea? TODO: * Should Koha::ILL::Request->statusalias use search_with_library_limits instead of search? * Can Koha::Patron::Attribute->authorised_value be removed now? LATER: * Remove the in-memory cache only from the Koha::AuthorisedValues->search_* methods and consider using L2 cache. (?) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. You are watching all bug changes.

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=40554 --- Comment #5 from David Cook <dcook@prosentient.com.au> --- I have a vague memory of adding/fixing some caching in Koha::AuthorisedValues, so I'm sure there's more that could be done there for sure. Bug 35579 Bug 34051 Maybe those two could be adapted to use the model here instead. I haven't looked at them for a couple of years, so not sure off the top of my head. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=40554 --- Comment #6 from David Cook <dcook@prosentient.com.au> --- (In reply to Jonathan Druart from comment #4)

Is it worth investing more time in this? Who supports this idea?

On the surface, it sounds like a good idea. As for investing time, I'm not 100% sure. Personally, I find it difficult to test bugs like this, because they make a lot of changes all at once, so it feels overwhelming trying to test them. If this bug introduced the caching mechanism, added some unit tests, and then changed one or two places and had a detailed test plan, then it would feel doable testing it, and then follow-up reports could be added for other .pm/.pl files which depend on this report. Does that answer the question? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.