Answers.Body: <p>I had the same reaction when I saw that field -- it doesn't appear to be used.</p>
  
  <p>In fact, I don't think it was ever used. Grepping some of the older releases (<a href="http://svn.civicrm.org/civicrm/branches/v2.0" rel="nofollow">http://svn.civicrm.org/civicrm/branches/v2.0</a>, <a href="http://svn.civicrm.org/civicrm/branches/v2.2" rel="nofollow">http://svn.civicrm.org/civicrm/branches/v2.2</a>), the field appears as part of the 2.1 schema upgrade; however, even then it's not used in any logic.</p>
  
  <p>My suspicion is that the field is more aspirational. (Theory: One person designed the cache layer and included <code>expired_date</code> in the schema because it's standard in caching systems; then another person implemented the cache logic but ignored that part of the design.)</p>
  
  <p>I wish the cache supported expiration/TTL, so I'm not anxious to remove the field. It would be even better if someone finished TTL support.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2015-06-17T21:31:51.803Z
Answers.Text: OK, I shalln't create an issue to remove it. I wouldn't want to hurt CiviCRM's feelings by removing its aspirations ;]
Answers.UserDisplayName: John
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2016-12-27T22:13:39.647Z
Answers.Text: I think we should make CiviCRM meet its aspirations!
Answers.UserDisplayName: ErichBSchulz
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2015-06-17T18:24:04.827Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2015-06-17T18:24:04.827Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Tim Otten
Body: <p>After inspecting some cache entries in the civicrm_cache table I've come across the field called 'expired_date' which is set to NULL in all cases.</p>
  
  <p>The only reference to the field I can find anywhere in the codebase is in the schema file. So it looks like this is an old field definition that is no longer used and can be removed?</p>
  
Tags: <database><cache>
Title: Is the cache field 'expired_date' no longer used?
ThreadText: # Is the cache field 'expired_date' no longer used?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2015-06-17)
  
  After inspecting some cache entries in the civicrm\_cache table I've come across the field called 'expired\_date' which is set to NULL in all cases.
  
  The only reference to the field I can find anywhere in the codebase is in the schema file. So it looks like this is an old field definition that is no longer used and can be removed?
  
  **Tags:** database, cache
  
  
  ---
  
  ## 1 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_1 on 2015-06-17. Score: 3 | Accepted answer
  
  I had the same reaction when I saw that field -- it doesn't appear to be used.
  
  In fact, I don't think it was ever used. Grepping some of the older releases (<http://svn.civicrm.org/civicrm/branches/v2.0>, <http://svn.civicrm.org/civicrm/branches/v2.2>), the field appears as part of the 2.1 schema upgrade; however, even then it's not used in any logic.
  
  My suspicion is that the field is more aspirational. (Theory: One person designed the cache layer and included `expired_date` in the schema because it's standard in caching systems; then another person implemented the cache logic but ignored that part of the design.)
  
  I wish the cache supported expiration/TTL, so I'm not anxious to remove the field. It would be even better if someone finished TTL support.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_0**: OK, I shalln't create an issue to remove it. I wouldn't want to hurt CiviCRM's feelings by removing its aspirations ;]  
  > **username_2**: I think we should make CiviCRM meet its aspirations!  
  
  ---
  
  