risk and memcached

Jeremiah Peschka jeremiah.peschka at gmail.com
Thu Aug 9 18:15:36 EDT 2012


Sure thing!

Any time that you can avoid a hit to disk, you should avoid using disk. In the RDBMS world, we put caches in front of SQL Server, even though SQL Server will devour all RAM in the known universe if you let it. Likewise, why read from potentially slow disks when you can try to hit cache first?

--- 
Jeremiah Peschka - Managing Director, Brent Ozar PLF, LLC
Microsoft SQL Server MVP

On Aug 9, 2012, at 1:39 PM, José Ghislain Quenum <jose.quenum at googlemail.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
> my question is fairly simple. If one is developing an app, does that make sense to combine memcached with a riak datastore, given that riak has its own caching mechanism?
> José
> _______________________________________________
> 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