RAID & memcached

Tue Feb 7 16:27:23 UTC 2006

> > Has anyone played with RAID over memcached ?
> You don't want memcached.  memcached is an unreliable 
> distributed hash based cache. Doing anything more with it is like
trying to 
> fit a square peg into a round hole.

Why not ? That is not because it was not meant to do it that it would be
a bad idea to do it.
I know there are issues with memcached (ie concurrency), but there also
are advantages (cost & performance being the main, I lack the first and
need a lot of the second).

> You might be better off writing something on top of Spread[1] 
> for group communication/reliability.

Spread is fine, but last time I tried it, I did not manage to scale it
to the level I needed (> 1000 writes/s).

More information about the memcached mailing list