Thomas - Lists
thomas-lists at mysnip.de
Wed Dec 14 09:06:12 UTC 2005
you misunderstood the original reply.
its up to *you* how you handle the caching.
memcached alone doesn't do any caching, you have to store data in the
cache and retrieve it.
if *you* put parts of the page in the cache and destroy only parts of
them if they are stale then its the way it is ;).
Jerome Macaranas wrote:
> does is it destroy all or destroy part of the cache w/c was updated?
> if it destroys all the cache content would it make any difference on
> the mysql cache... since the cache rebuilds it self everytime there is
> an manipulation on the data?
> im not trying to create hassle im just clearing some things.. : )
> ill put Lighttpd into consideration...
> On 12/14/05, *Adam Michaels* <adam at digitalagemedia.net
> <mailto:adam at digitalagemedia.net>> wrote:
> 1. You need to destroy the cache via a delete and then rebuild it
> with the new data. Your application is responsible for keeping the
> cache up to date.
> 2. Drop apache and use Lighttpd. It will use less memory and
> therefore leave you with more memory to use with memcached.
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Jerome Macaranas <mailto:jerome.m at gmail.com>
> *To:* memcached at lists.danga.com
> <mailto:memcached at lists.danga.com>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 14, 2005 12:40 AM
> *Subject:* Newbie inquiry
> Hi ALL,
> Im trying to get enough details on memcached to check
> whether it is feasible to use it on a site that is very dynamic.
> Can anyone clear my clouded mind. :)
> 1. If data are cached and in the event that the page was
> updated what happens to the cache? will it be completely
> reconstructed? or only portion of it will be replaced?
> 2. Would you recommend memcache to sit on the same box
> with apache with a 4G RAM resource?
More information about the memcached