Correct statement about dropping older entries

[gaetanww]

Previously the README stated that older entries were removed. The actual behaviour is that an unspecified element is removed from the set.[1]

[noxdafox]

Technically the statement is correct. Once a new cache item is inserted while the cache is full, older elements already present within the cache will be removed to make space. What you are expecting is that the oldest elements are removed and this is indeed not guaranteed.

That said, I can see how the above can be confusing.

Nevertheless, I would not use the term random for two reasons.

• It is not actually random but deterministic. Yet, implementation dependent and it might vary between versions of Erlang.
• Random suggest the newest element might be removed which is actually incorrect. The new element is always ensured to be inserted.

What about using:

If the deduplication cache fills up, already existing entries will be removed to give space to new ones.

?

[gaetanww]

Thank you for your quick reply, I agree with you on both counts (i.e., older being technically correct and random being unadapted).

What about using: If the deduplication cache fills up, already existing entries will be removed to give space to new ones. ?

May I suggest If the deduplication cache fills up, unspecified existing entries will be removed to give space to new ones ?

This explicitly carries the information that users of the plugin shouldn't rely on entries being removed in a specific order (in particular., this is not a LRU cache).

[noxdafox]

Sorry for the late reply. That works better, could you please update the PR?

[noxdafox]

Thanks!