memcached replication

Les Mikesell lesmikesell at
Wed Sep 5 17:43:08 UTC 2007

Brenton Alker wrote:

> Which can only really be overcome (I think, if anyone knows better tell
> me :P) by only writing to the master. This means the application, or a
> proxy for it, must be aware of the master/slave situation. But your
> right this doesn't solve the lag problem

> Also, the original poster (Masaaki ?) mentioned it was not "not
> scalability, or high performance" but redundancy and fail-over. Which
> means it would only be used in extreme cases, and you could probably
> forgive the cache misses (dependant on application of course)

Is it really worth this effort compared to just distributing the cache 
across the 2 (or more) servers and making sure your backend data source 
can handle the load when one of the cache servers is down?

   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at

More information about the memcached mailing list