NoSQL combinations - what works best?
jlangevin at loomlearning.com
Tue Aug 9 13:59:40 EDT 2011
That's my understanding as well. The memcache client determines what server
to store it's data on via the hashing process, so then if that server dies,
you lose that subset of data.
Interesting read on Redis & clustering:
Smart clients will take persistent connections to many
nodes, will cache hashslot -> node info, and will update the
table when they receive a -MOVED error.
Wilmington, NC: (910) 241-0433 - jlangevin at loomlearning.com -
www.loomlearning.com - Skype: intel352
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 1:48 PM, Alexander Sicular <siculars at gmail.com>wrote:
> Hmm. Not that I know of. Afaik, the memcache server itself is standalone.
> Any distributed magic happens at the client level via some circular hashing
> voodoo or sharding pixie dust. Keep the client mojo and swap memcached for
> @siculars on twitter
> Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 9, 2011, at 13:23, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/9/2011 12:08 PM, Alexander Sicular wrote:
>>> Outside of legacy concerns I have no idea why someone would select
>>> memcache over redis for a new application today. Redis gives you
>>> everything memcache does plus a boat load of
>>> omg-wtf-where-has-this-been-**all-my-life capabilities.
>> The main point of memcache is that it is distributed and the clients
>> automatically handle failover at any reasonably large scale. How do you
>> arrange that with redis?
>> Les Mikesell
>> lesmikesell at gmail.com
>> riak-users mailing list
>> riak-users at lists.basho.com
> riak-users mailing list
> riak-users at lists.basho.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the riak-users