Copied to clipboard

Flag this post as spam?

This post will be reported to the moderators as potential spam to be looked at


  • Ismail Mayat 4511 posts 10092 karma points MVP 2x admin c-trib
    Sep 11, 2020 @ 14:06
    Ismail Mayat
    0

    no xml cache file in load balanced environment

    I am using 7.15.4, I have a load balanced setup. We used to have an xml config file and publishing on primary would result in the secondary servers being updated as expected.

    With our client due to security we have a good reason not to have and xml cache file so I have taken it out by making the config change in umbracoSettings. The issue we are seeing now is that publishing on the primary no longer results in updates on the secondary, we have to go onto the secondary and then rebuild the xml cache.

    Has anyone seen this before?

    Regards

    Ismail

  • Yakov Lebski 591 posts 2347 karma points
    Sep 11, 2020 @ 16:15
    Yakov Lebski
    0

    check key umbracoLocalTempStorage or umbracoContentXMLStorage maybe it saves xml in EnvironmentTemp

  • Ismail Mayat 4511 posts 10092 karma points MVP 2x admin c-trib
    Sep 11, 2020 @ 16:19
    Ismail Mayat
    0

    I have turned of saving of the file, I do not want it on file store

    <XmlCacheEnabled>False</XmlCacheEnabled>
    

    So I am guessing its now getting stuff form contentXml table instead.

  • Ismail Mayat 4511 posts 10092 karma points MVP 2x admin c-trib
    Sep 14, 2020 @ 08:54
    Ismail Mayat
    0

    I do not want an xml cache file, I currently do not get one which is exactly what I want. However it looks like when in a cluster and you publish on one the other server in the cluster is not getting updated.

  • Yakov Lebski 591 posts 2347 karma points
    Sep 11, 2020 @ 16:26
    Yakov Lebski
    0

    if XmlCacheEnabled is false Umbraco will retrive cache from DB. For security propose you can move to EnvironmentTemp, chech will be created in windows folder and will be in site folder

Please Sign in or register to post replies

Write your reply to:

Draft