dada
Jan 25, 2019
  16769
(9 votes)

Common Find caching pitfalls

Under certain conditions, the cache duration set with .StaticallyCacheFor(minutes) does not last as long as specified.
There are three common reasons for this.

More on .StatisticallyCacheFor can be found here
https://world.episerver.com/documentation/developer-guides/find/NET-Client-API/searching/Caching/


.Filter() on a datetime property

Any .Filter() on a datetime property with second (or finer) resolution should be rounded up to the nearest minutes matching the wanted cache duration. As the cache key is based on the query payload we don't want it to change more frequently than the cache duration otherwise we will rarely utilise the cache as a new cache is generated for every request and a new request sent to the Find service. 

Here is an example of such a filter extracted from the JSON sent to the _search endpoint. You could inspect your requests with Fiddler.

"range": {
"EndDate$$date": {
"from": "2019-01-24T20:59:59Z",
"to": "9999-12-31T23:59:59.9999999Z",
"include_lower": false,
"include_upper": true
}
}


.FilterForVisitor()

.FilterForVisitor is a set of filters including .ExcludeDelete, .PublishedInCurrentLanguage, and .FilterOnReadAccess.

.PublishedInCurrentLanguage contains a filter on a datetime and as such is affected by the same issue described in point #1.

In a later version of Find (13.1) the datetime sent through to the .PublishedInCurrentLanguage() method uses a NOW() function instead of an actual value and is therefor not affected by this.

If on an earlier version, replace .FilterForVisitor() with the individual filters and round up the datetime used with PublishedInCurrentLanguage() just as you would have if you've used a custom datetime filter as pointed out earlier.

.GetContentResult()

When using .GetContentResult() unlike .GetResult() there is a cache dependency on published content. If there are any updates cache will be evicted. For Commerce sites updates are typically frequent and could therefore have a negative impact on cache.

Our recommendation is to use a custom .GetContentResult() where cache with this dependency is bypassed. This is commented out here.
Don't forget to add your .StaticallyCacheFor() to control the cache duration.


public static IContentResult<TContentData> GetContentResult<TContentData>(this ITypeSearch<TContentData> search, int cacheForSeconds = 60, bool cacheForEditorsAndAdmins = false)
where TContentData : IContentData
{
if (typeof(IContent).IsAssignableFrom(typeof(IContent)))
{
search = search.Filter(x => ((IContentData)x).MatchTypeHierarchy(typeof(IContent)));
}
var projectedSearch = search
.Select(x =>
new ContentInLanguageReference(
new ContentReference(((IContent)x).ContentLink.ID, ((IContent)x).ContentLink.ProviderName),
((ILocalizable) x).Language.Name));

//Apply caching for non-editors
//if (cacheForEditorsAndAdmins || !(PrincipalInfo.HasEditAccess || PrincipalInfo.HasAdminAccess))
//{
// var cacheSettings = ServiceLocator.Current.GetInstance<IContentCacheKeyCreator>();
// projectedSearch = projectedSearch.StaticallyCacheFor(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(cacheForSeconds), new CacheDependency(null, new string[] { cacheSettings.RootKeyName }));
//}

var searchResult = projectedSearch.GetResult();

var contentRepository = ServiceLocator.Current.GetInstance<IContentRepository>();
var fetchedContent = new Dictionary<ContentInLanguageReference, IContent>();
foreach (var language in searchResult.GroupBy(x => x.Language))
{
foreach (var content in contentRepository.GetItems(language.Select(x => x.ContentLink).ToList(), new LanguageSelector(language.Key)))
{
fetchedContent[new ContentInLanguageReference(content)] = content;
}
}

var sortedContent = new List<TContentData>();
foreach (var reference in searchResult)
{
IContent content;
if (fetchedContent.TryGetValue(reference, out content) && content is TContentData)
{
sortedContent.Add((TContentData)content);
}
else
{
log.WarnFormat("Search results contain reference to a content with reference \"{0}\" in language \"{1}\" but no such content could been found.", reference.ContentLink, reference.Language);
}
}

return new ContentResult<TContentData>(sortedContent, searchResult);
Jan 25, 2019

Comments

Binh Nguyen Thi
Binh Nguyen Thi Jan 28, 2019 07:34 AM

Hi dada,

Thanks for useful information. About .FilterForVisistor(), I am using EPiServer.Find 12.7.1 and see that the fix has been already available within NormalizeInMinutes method. So I am not sure that the exact version of EPiServer.Find that fixed this bug. 

Sven-Erik Jonsson
Sven-Erik Jonsson Jan 30, 2019 10:13 AM

If you want to get around the time based caching limitations brought on by '.FilterForVisitor()' in earlier versions of Find than 13.1 you can just implement your own IClient, ICommands, then implement your own SearchCommand and MultiSearchCommand that generates cache keys that are temporally indifferent. Piece of cake.

Andreas J
Andreas J Dec 17, 2019 04:01 PM

"When using .GetContentResult() unlike .GetResult() there is a cache dependency on published content. If there are any updates cache will be evicted. For Commerce sites updates are typically frequent and could therefore have a negative impact on cache."

Is this really true? I can see that GetContentResult() uses a cache dependency on IContentCacheKeyCreator.RootKeyName. It would be crazy if every every cached item with that dependency would be invalidated as soon as some (unrelated) commerce content changed.

I assume that many items are cached with root master keys, but I hope/think that those keys are only invalidated in "extreme" cases.

dada
dada May 15, 2020 09:31 AM

Hi Andreas,

Good catch. You are correct. When I wrote this blog post initially Find used another less optimal cache dependency (DataFactoryCache.VersionKey)

This was fixed in https://world.episerver.com/documentation/Release-Notes/ReleaseNote/?releaseNoteId=FIND-3039

Please login to comment.
Latest blogs
Understanding Optimizely Opal Cost vs Value

Every Opal conversation seems to start with the same question: "What does it cost?" Fair, but it's only half the question. Cost tells you what you'...

K Khan | Jun 15, 2026

Leverage — The CMS Edits One Item at a Time. The Work Doesn't.

Editorial work arrives in batches — a product rename across two hundred support articles, five hundred FAQs that should become blocks, an SEO refre...

Allan Thraen | Jun 15, 2026 |

“Learning by Doing – Optimizely OPAL Series” | Episode 02 is Live!

Introduction With Optimizely OPAL, we’re not just generating content—we’re designing intelligent workflows. But after working with teams and...

Ratish | Jun 14, 2026 |

Content Variations in CMS 13, Part 3: Audiences vs Audiences

Executive summary. Part 2 left the experiment running against Everyone . Real projects don't look like that. So this part wires those same CMS...

Piotr | Jun 14, 2026

Hiding Pages in the Optimizely CMS 13 Page Tree

When working with large Optimizely CMS solutions, the page tree can quickly become one of the biggest sources of editor frustration. This is...

Pär Wissmark | Jun 13, 2026 |

Four database surprises when upgrading from CMS 11 to CMS 13

We're in the middle of migrating a fairly large site from CMS 11 / .NET Framework to CMS 13 / .NET 10. The code migration is one thing, but the...

Per Nergård (MVP) | Jun 12, 2026