Hello Daniel Bichuete,
When using the OpenAccess distributed L2 caching, as long as OpenAccess is the only one making updates, suitable events will be fired so that the cache is consistent across all applications. This means that on notification applications automatically evict the modified persistent objects. As described in the blog post I referenced, there is a time window which allows mismatches, i.e. one L2 cache is updated and another one is not. After this time elapses, synchronization takes place. The L1 cache of a scope, however, does not know of this update and you should use the Refresh() method if you keep long living scopes. With short-living scopes – ones that you quickly instantiate to make a modification and then eagerly dispose of the instance – you should normally not worry about inconsistencies. This is because of the fact that when starting a transaction the L1 cache is invalidated.
I believe you can also have a look at the online help article which reveals a bit more on our implementation. Although the topics you see give details about the old scope approach, you can take full benefit of the second level caching with the new domain model.
Feel free to contact us if you need further information.
the Telerik team
Do you want to have your say when we set our development plans?
Do you want to know when a feature you care about is added or when a bug fixed?
Telerik Public Issue Tracking
system and vote to affect the priority of the items