<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for SharePoint Interface</title>
	<atom:link href="http://sharepointinterface.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://sharepointinterface.com</link>
	<description>Multidisciplinary discourse on the topics of SharePoint architecture, development, and administration.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Jul 2010 00:53:58 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The SharePoint Summer Whirlwind Tour by Links (7/26/2010) &#171; Everything SharePoint/Silverlight</title>
		<link>http://sharepointinterface.com/2010/07/25/the-sharepoint-summer-whirlwind-tour/#comment-208</link>
		<dc:creator>Links (7/26/2010) &#171; Everything SharePoint/Silverlight</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Jul 2010 00:53:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://sharepointinterface.wordpress.com/?p=410#comment-208</guid>
		<description>[...] The SharePoint Summer Whirlwind Tour [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] The SharePoint Summer Whirlwind Tour [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Site Collection Backups and Workflow Portability in SharePoint 2010 by Migrating Workflows to SharePoint 2010 Question &#124; The 14 Folder</title>
		<link>http://sharepointinterface.com/2010/06/24/site-collection-backups-and-workflow-portability-in-sharepoint-2010/#comment-207</link>
		<dc:creator>Migrating Workflows to SharePoint 2010 Question &#124; The 14 Folder</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Jul 2010 21:36:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://sharepointinterface.wordpress.com/?p=399#comment-207</guid>
		<description>[...] for Windows SharePoint Services and Office SharePoint Server, Versioning long running workfows, and Site Collection Backups and Workflow Portability in SharePoint 2010. VN:F [1.9.3_1094]Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)AKPC_IDS += [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] for Windows SharePoint Services and Office SharePoint Server, Versioning long running workfows, and Site Collection Backups and Workflow Portability in SharePoint 2010. VN:F [1.9.3_1094]Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)AKPC_IDS += [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Site Collection Backups and Workflow Portability in SharePoint 2010 by Sean McDonough</title>
		<link>http://sharepointinterface.com/2010/06/24/site-collection-backups-and-workflow-portability-in-sharepoint-2010/#comment-206</link>
		<dc:creator>Sean McDonough</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Jul 2010 03:40:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://sharepointinterface.wordpress.com/?p=399#comment-206</guid>
		<description>Hey Alex - thanks for the feedback!  Great to hear from you!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Alex &#8211; thanks for the feedback!  Great to hear from you!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Site Collection Backups and Workflow Portability in SharePoint 2010 by Alex Angas</title>
		<link>http://sharepointinterface.com/2010/06/24/site-collection-backups-and-workflow-portability-in-sharepoint-2010/#comment-205</link>
		<dc:creator>Alex Angas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Jul 2010 03:01:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://sharepointinterface.wordpress.com/?p=399#comment-205</guid>
		<description>This is a great model for thorough and well thought-out testing of virtually any black box. Thank you!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is a great model for thorough and well thought-out testing of virtually any black box. Thank you!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Site Collection Backups and Workflow Portability in SharePoint 2010 by Sean McDonough</title>
		<link>http://sharepointinterface.com/2010/06/24/site-collection-backups-and-workflow-portability-in-sharepoint-2010/#comment-196</link>
		<dc:creator>Sean McDonough</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jun 2010 13:20:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://sharepointinterface.wordpress.com/?p=399#comment-196</guid>
		<description>Thanks, Jeremy!  This was definitely a case of &quot;had to have the facts.&quot;  I love a little experimentation every now and then, as well.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks, Jeremy!  This was definitely a case of &#8220;had to have the facts.&#8221;  I love a little experimentation every now and then, as well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Site Collection Backups and Workflow Portability in SharePoint 2010 by Jeremy Thake</title>
		<link>http://sharepointinterface.com/2010/06/24/site-collection-backups-and-workflow-portability-in-sharepoint-2010/#comment-195</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy Thake</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jun 2010 05:32:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://sharepointinterface.wordpress.com/?p=399#comment-195</guid>
		<description>Great write up mate, very good read! Thanks for taking the time to investigate this, look forward to your backup guide too!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great write up mate, very good read! Thanks for taking the time to investigate this, look forward to your backup guide too!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Site Collection Backups and Workflow Portability in SharePoint 2010 by Tweets that mention Site Collection Backups and Workflow Portability in SharePoint 2010 « SharePoint Interface -- Topsy.com</title>
		<link>http://sharepointinterface.com/2010/06/24/site-collection-backups-and-workflow-portability-in-sharepoint-2010/#comment-193</link>
		<dc:creator>Tweets that mention Site Collection Backups and Workflow Portability in SharePoint 2010 « SharePoint Interface -- Topsy.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jun 2010 22:44:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://sharepointinterface.wordpress.com/?p=399#comment-193</guid>
		<description>[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Sean McDonough, Toby Mai. Toby Mai said: RT @spmcdonough: New blog post on #TechNet notes, site collection backups, &amp; workflow portability with #SharePoint 2010: http://is.gd/d2mSM [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Sean McDonough, Toby Mai. Toby Mai said: RT @spmcdonough: New blog post on #TechNet notes, site collection backups, &amp; workflow portability with #SharePoint 2010: <a href="http://is.gd/d2mSM" rel="nofollow">http://is.gd/d2mSM</a> [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on SharePoint, WebDAV, and a Case of the 405 Status Codes by Sean McDonough</title>
		<link>http://sharepointinterface.com/2009/12/28/sharepoint-webdav-and-a-case-of-the-405-status-codes/#comment-192</link>
		<dc:creator>Sean McDonough</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jun 2010 16:49:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sharepointinterface.wordpress.com/?p=309#comment-192</guid>
		<description>Two weeks -- ouch.  I&#039;m glad that things are working now, Massimo.  Thanks for the comment!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Two weeks &#8212; ouch.  I&#8217;m glad that things are working now, Massimo.  Thanks for the comment!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on SharePoint, WebDAV, and a Case of the 405 Status Codes by Massimo Pancini</title>
		<link>http://sharepointinterface.com/2009/12/28/sharepoint-webdav-and-a-case-of-the-405-status-codes/#comment-191</link>
		<dc:creator>Massimo Pancini</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jun 2010 13:39:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sharepointinterface.wordpress.com/?p=309#comment-191</guid>
		<description>Two weeks spent trying to figure out why Explorer View wasn&#039;t working. Then, I read your post. THANK YOU!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Two weeks spent trying to figure out why Explorer View wasn&#8217;t working. Then, I read your post. THANK YOU!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Manually Clearing the MOSS 2007 BLOB Cache by Sean McDonough</title>
		<link>http://sharepointinterface.com/2009/10/30/manually-clearing-the-moss-2007-blob-cache/#comment-189</link>
		<dc:creator>Sean McDonough</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 May 2010 04:01:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sharepointinterface.wordpress.com/?p=268#comment-189</guid>
		<description>Yash,

If a refresh of the page or clearing the client-side cache of images fixes the issue you&#039;re encountering, then chances are that there is no server-side fix that is going to address the behavior you&#039;re seeing.  If the MOSS BLOB cache is involved (something you&#039;ll have to verify), then I&#039;m guessing that the web.config entry for the  element on the web application in question specifies a max-age attribute value.

When the max-age attribute is specified, images and other BLOB resources that are served up to clients are passed back to the browser with client cacheability headers.  In essence, the client will hold onto such images and resources until the amount of time specified by the max-age attribute has elapsed.  Only after that amount of time has elapsed will the browser once again begin requesting the images or resources from the WFE.  This is why a client-side solution, such as forcing a re-fetch or clearing the browser cache, is the only one that will actually get the browser to re-request the objects in question.

It&#039;s been a couple of days since you submitted your comment.  It&#039;s common for the max-age attribute to be set to something like 12 hours.  Your situation may even be fixed by now.  If it&#039;s not, and the max-age attribute is causing client-side caching, you should be able to use the value of the attribute to determine when things will clear up for you.  The max-age attribute specifies a client-side caching duration in seconds, so divide the value by 3600 to determine how many hours objects will remain cached on client browsers.

Again, my hypothesis is entirely dependent on BLOB caching being enabled and a max-age attribute being set.  If either of these aren&#039;t in-play, then what I&#039;m proposing isn&#039;t what&#039;s happening.

Good luck!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yash,</p>
<p>If a refresh of the page or clearing the client-side cache of images fixes the issue you&#8217;re encountering, then chances are that there is no server-side fix that is going to address the behavior you&#8217;re seeing.  If the MOSS BLOB cache is involved (something you&#8217;ll have to verify), then I&#8217;m guessing that the web.config entry for the  element on the web application in question specifies a max-age attribute value.</p>
<p>When the max-age attribute is specified, images and other BLOB resources that are served up to clients are passed back to the browser with client cacheability headers.  In essence, the client will hold onto such images and resources until the amount of time specified by the max-age attribute has elapsed.  Only after that amount of time has elapsed will the browser once again begin requesting the images or resources from the WFE.  This is why a client-side solution, such as forcing a re-fetch or clearing the browser cache, is the only one that will actually get the browser to re-request the objects in question.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s been a couple of days since you submitted your comment.  It&#8217;s common for the max-age attribute to be set to something like 12 hours.  Your situation may even be fixed by now.  If it&#8217;s not, and the max-age attribute is causing client-side caching, you should be able to use the value of the attribute to determine when things will clear up for you.  The max-age attribute specifies a client-side caching duration in seconds, so divide the value by 3600 to determine how many hours objects will remain cached on client browsers.</p>
<p>Again, my hypothesis is entirely dependent on BLOB caching being enabled and a max-age attribute being set.  If either of these aren&#8217;t in-play, then what I&#8217;m proposing isn&#8217;t what&#8217;s happening.</p>
<p>Good luck!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
