←back to thread

Caching is an abstraction, not an optimization

(buttondown.com)
134 points samuel246 | 1 comments | 01 Jul 25 10:42 UTC | HN request time: 0.404s | source
Show context
ckdot2 ◴[03 Jul 25 19:03 UTC] No.44458190[source]▶
"I think now caching is probably best understood as a tool for making software simpler" - that's cute. Caching might be beneficial for many cases, but if it doesn't do one thing then this is simplifying software. There's that famous quote "There are only two hard things in Computer Science: cache invalidation and naming things.", and, sure, it's a bit ironical, but there's some truth in there.
replies(11): >>44458265 #>>44458365 #>>44458502 #>>44459091 #>>44459123 #>>44459372 #>>44459490 #>>44459654 #>>44459905 #>>44460039 #>>44460321 #
bell-cot ◴[03 Jul 25 19:10 UTC] No.44458265[source]▶
(You forgot off-by-1 errors.)

All software has to name things, and count. Caching (including invalidation) is best understood as a liability. If you can foist it off on your CPU and OS and DB, good for you. Programming whatever you're actually trying to get done is already hard enough.

replies(2): >>44459048 #>>44464137 #
yxhuvud ◴[03 Jul 25 20:48 UTC] No.44459048[source]▶
Off by 1-errors is not part of the original quote, but is just a later addon to make it funny.

They also tend not to be very hard.

replies(2): >>44459283 #>>44459892 #
1. TeMPOraL ◴[03 Jul 25 21:18 UTC] No.44459283[source]▶
Except when they're part of some base assumptions in the domain or dozen of layers of abstractions below you. They are hard to prevent from happening.