Thats pretty much correct. The redundancy comes into play when you have your cache spread over multiple machines in that you dont lose you entire cache if you lose one machine.<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 9/27/07,
<b class="gmail_sendername">Dan Christian</b> <<a href="mailto:dchristian@google.com">dchristian@google.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
On 9/26/07, Marcus Bointon <<a href="mailto:marcus@synchromedia.co.uk">marcus@synchromedia.co.uk</a>> wrote:<br>> We are using the latest PHP memcache client which implements consistent<br>> hashing strategy.<br>
> If you are only running one server, you might be better off using APC for<br>> your caching. If you have 2 servers, you might get better performance by<br>> running your PHP on both, and also using both for memcache (with memcache
<br>> the more physical servers you have, the faster it can go, on average). This<br>> will also give you a bit of redundancy, letting your service continue if one<br>> server dies.<br><br>I'm a bit confused about the redundancy aspects of memcached. My
<br>understanding is that you can have multiple memcacheds, but they store<br>different objects (based on the keys).<br><br>Tell me if I understand this right. If I run a memcached on each of 2<br>machines, then the failure of a machine takes out half the cached
<br>objects. These values will continue to be un-cached until that<br>machine is removed from the client's configuration.<br><br>Is there an automatic recovery mechanism?<br>Is there a (big) performance hit when the configuration changes?
<br><br>-Dan C<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>"Be excellent to each other"