NoSQL combinations - what works best?

Alexander Sicular siculars at gmail.com
Tue Aug 9 13:48:45 EDT 2011


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 redis.


@siculars on twitter
http://siculars.posterous.com

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
> http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com




More information about the riak-users mailing list