Terracotta L2 cache invalidation by messaging - caching

I am trying to evaluate Terracotta Disctributed Cache with ehcache. I have the following query. There are 20+ apps which will use a TAS distributed cache. As I understand there will be a L1 cache in each of these apps and a L2 in the cluster. The cluster cache data is fronting a Database which will be updated by a different app which we do not have access to. So we only read from this DB. But the DB updates needs to flow to the cache.
By the way of DB triggers the updated (keys alone) are stored in a temp table. In specific intervals a job monitors this table and collects the keys in the cache that needs to be expired. This is a separate batch job.
From here I need help. How do I inform the TAS L2 cache to expire/evict these keys? What options in terracotta are there?. Will this expiry event flow from L2 to all the individual apps? What is the time lag? I do not want to send the expiry keys to all the individual apps. Can this be accomplished?.
Thanks for the help!

Maybe I am missing something, but I am not sure why you would want to expire/evict those keys instead of simply calling cache.removeAll(keys). This removal will be automatically propagated to all L1 nodes which have those entries in their local cache.
The time lag depends on the consistency settings of the distributed cache.

Related

how to keep caching up to date

when memecached or Redis is used for data-storage caching. How is the cache being updated when the value changed?
For, example. If I read key1 from cache the first time and it missed, then I pull value1 and put key1=value1 into cache.
After that if the value of key1 changed to value2.
How is value in cache updated or invalidated?
Does that mean whenever there is a change on key1's value. Either the application or database need to check if this key1 is in cache and update it?
Since you are using a cache, you have to tolerate the data inconsistency problem, i.e. at some time point, data in cache is different from data in database.
You don't need to update the value in cache, whenever the value has been changed. Otherwise, the whole cache system will be very complicated (e.g. you have to maintain a list of keys that have been cached), and it also might be unnecessary to do that (e.g. the key-value might be used only once, and no need to update it any more).
How can we update the data in cache and keep the cache system simple?
Normally, besides setting or updating a key-value pair in cache, we also set a TIMEOUT for each key. After that, client can get the key-value pair from the cache. However, if a key reaches the timeout, the cache system removes the key-value pair from the cache. This is called THE KEY HAS BEEN EXPIRED. The next time, the client trying to get that key from cache, will get nothing. This is called CACHE MISS. In this case, client has to get the key-value pair from database, and update it to cache with a new timeout.
If the data has been updated in database, while the key has NOT been expired in cache, client will get inconsistent data. However, when the key has been expired, its value will be retrieved from database and inserted into cache by some client. After that, other clients will get updated data until the data has been changed again.
How to set the timeout?
Normally, there're two kinds of expiration policy:
Expire in N seconds/minutes/hours...
Expire at some future timepoint, e.g. expire at 2017/7/30 00:00:00
A large timeout can largely reduce the load of database, while the data might be out-of-date for a long time. A small timeout can keep the data up-to-date as much as possible, while the database will have a heavy load. So you have to balance the trade-off when designing the timeout.
How does Redis expire keys?
Redis has two ways to expire keys:
When client tries to operate on a key, Redis checks if the key has reached the timeout. If it does, Redis removes the key, and acts as if the key doesn't exist. In this way, Redis ensures that client doesn't get expired data.
Redis also has an expiration thread that samples keys at a configured frequency. If the keys reach the timeout, Redis removes these keys. In this way, Redis can accelerate the key expiration process.
You can simply empty the particular cache value in the api function where insertion or updation of that particular value is performed. This way the server will fetch the updated value in the next request because you had already emptied the cache value.
Here is a diagram which will make it easier for you to understand:
I had similar issue related to stale data esp. in two cases:
When i get bulk messages/events
In this (my) use case, I am writing score to Redis cache and reading it again in subsequent call. In case of bulk messages, due to weak consistency in Redis, data might not be replicated to all replicas when I request again to read the data against same key(which is generally few ms(1-2 ms).
Remediation:
In this case, I was getting stale data. In order to address that, used cache on cache i.e. Loading TTL cache on Redis Cache. Here, it used to check the data in loading cache first, if not present, it checks data in Redis cache. Once done, both the caches are being updated.
in distributed system(k8s) where I have multiple pods
(kafka is being used as messaging broker)
When went for above strategy, we have another problem, what if data for a key previously served by say pod1, reaches to pod2. This has bigger impact, as it leads to data inconsistencies.
Remediation:
Here kafka partition key was set as "key" which is set in Redis. This way, we are getting subsequent messages to a particular pod only. In case of restart of pods, cache will be build again.
This solved our problem.

what is the best strategy to sync data between DB and redis cache

We are using Oracle db, we would like to use Redis Cache mechanism, We add some subset of DB data to cache, does it sync with DB automatically when there is a change in the data in DB or we will have to implement the sync strategy, if yes, what is the best way to do it.
does it sync with DB automatically when there is a change in the data in DB
No, it doesn't.
we will have to implement the sync strategy, if yes, what is the best way to do it.
This will depend on your particular case. Usually caches are sync'd in two common ways:
Data cached with expiration. Once cached data has expired, a background process adds fresh data to cache, and so on. Usually there's data that will be refreshed in different intervals: 10 minutes, 1 hour, every day...
Data cached on demand. When an user requests some data, that request goes through the non-cached road, and that request stores the result in cache, and a limited number of subsequent requests will read cached data directly if cache is available. This approach can fall into #1 one too in terms of cache invalidation interval.
Now I believe that you've enough details to think about what could be your best strategy in your particular case!
Additionally to what mathias wrote, you can look ath the problem from dynamic/static perspective:
Real/Time approach: each time a process changes the DB data, you dispatch an event or a message to a queue where a worker handles corresponding indexing of the cache. Some might event implement it as a DB Trigger (I don't like)
Static/delayed approach: Once a day/hour/minute.. depending on your needs there is a process that does a batch/whole indexing of the DB data to the cache.

Difference between In-Memory cache and In-Memory Database

I was wondering if I could get an explanation between the differences between In-Memory cache(redis, memcached), In-Memory data grids (gemfire) and In-Memory database (VoltDB). I'm having a hard time distinguishing the key characteristics between the 3.
Cache - By definition means it is stored in memory. Any data stored in memory (RAM) for faster access is called cache. Examples: Ehcache, Memcache Typically you put an object in cache with String as Key and access the cache using the Key. It is very straight forward. It depends on the application when to access the cahce vs database and no complex processing happens in the Cache. If the cache spans multiple machines, then it is called distributed cache. For example, Netflix uses EVCAche which is built on top of Memcache to store the users movie recommendations that you see on the home screen.
In Memory Database - It has all the features of a Cache plus come processing/querying capabilities. Redis falls under this category. Redis supports multiple data structures and you can query the data in the Redis ( examples like get last 10 accessed items, get the most used item etc). It can span multiple machine and is usually very high performant and also support persistence to disk if needed. For example, Twitter uses Redis database to store the timeline information.
I don't know about gemfire and VoltDB, but even memcached and redis are very different. Memcached is really simple caching, a place to store variables in a very uncomplex fashion, and then retrieve them so you don't have to go to a file or database lookup every time you need that data. The types of variable are very simple. Redis on the other hand is actually an in memory database, with a very interesting selection of data types. It has a wonderful data type for doing sorted lists, which works great for applications such as leader boards. You add your new record to the data, and it gets sorted automagically.
So I wouldn't get too hung up on the categories. You really need to examine each tool differently to see what it can do for you, and the application you're building. It's kind of like trying to draw comparisons on nosql databases - they are all very different, and do different things well.
I would add that things in the "database" category tend to have more features to protect and replicate your data than a simple "cache". Cache is temporary (usually) where as database data should be persistent. Many cache solutions I've seen do not persist to disk, so if you lost power to your whole cluster, you'd lose everything in cache.
But there are some cache solutions that have persistence and replication features too, so the line is blurry.
An in-memory Cache is a common query store therefore relieves DB of read Workloads. Common examples of in-memory cache are Redis cache. An example could be Web site storing popular searches made by clients thereby relieving the DB of some load.
In-memory Cache provides query functionality on top of caching (storing session data in RAM (temporary storage)).
Memcache falls in the temp store caching category.

JCS - Dynamic update of cache from database

I maintain an application which leverage JCS to hold the cache in JVM (JVM1). This data will be loaded from a database for the first time when the JVM gets started/ restarted.
However the database will be accessed from a different JVM (JVM2) and will help adding data to database.
In order to make sure this additional/ newly added records loaded into cache, we need to restart JVM1 for every addition in the database.
Is there a way we can refresh/load the cache (only for newly added records) in JVM1 for regular intervals (instead of frequent db polling)?
Thanks,
Jaya Krishna
Can you not simply have JVM1 first check the in memory cache, and then, if the item is absent in the in-memory cache, check the database cache?
If you, however, need to list all items in existance, of some certain type, and don't want to access the database. Then, for JVM1 to know that there's a new item in the databse, I suppose that either 1) JVM2 would have to send a network message to JVM1 telling it that there're new entries in the database. Or 2) there could be a database trigger that fires when new data is inserted, and sends a network message to JVM1. (But having the database send network messages to an application server feels rather weird I think.) — I think these approaches seem rather complicated though.
Have you considered some kind of new-item-ids table, that logs the IDs of items recently inserted into the database? It could be updated by a database trigger, or by JVM1 and 2 when they write to the databse. Then JVM1 would only need to poll this single table perhaps once per second, to get a list of new IDs, and then it could load the new items from the database.
Finally, have you considered a distributed cache? So that both JVM1 and 2 share the same cache, and JVM1 and 2 writes items to this cache when they insert them into the datbase. (This approach would be somewhat similar to sending network messages between JVM1 and 2, but the distributed cache system would send the messages itself, so you didn't need to write any new code)

Cache Managers in Enterprise Library caching Application block

I have been using asp web cache in all my prior application developments. I am looking into Ent. Lib caching application block which seems pretty interesting.
However, I have need some clarifications on how the cache managers work?
1- What is the purpose of having multiple cache managers, is it to partition cahing items ? I am used to have only a single cache manager (similar to ent. lib. default cache manager)?
2- Does each cache manager maps to an individual hash table ? or they are all going to be stored in one hash table?
3- If I only use the Null storage option (no backing store) does it make a difference if I use multiple cache managers?
Thanks,
Robert B.
Multiple cache managers allow you to specify different policies for each. These include:
the maximum number of items you allow in the cache
how often you'd like to poll for expired items
Usually, you'd want these to be configurable based on the items you store in the cache. If you have volatile items that you store for just an hour, you'd like to poll for expired items every ten minutes. If your items can stay in the cache for a week, polling every ten minutes makes little sense and is a waste of resources.

Resources