Why not let the fs handle this ??

[Jon Drukman]

Steven Grimm wrote:
> Yes. One common setup is to run a memcached instance on every machine 
> rather than dedicating machines specifically to it. Have a memcached on 
> each web server. Since each item is only cached on one server, you can 
> get by with a relatively small cache on each machine. And then your 
> database load only goes up a little if you lose or reboot one of the 
> servers.

Has this actually worked out well in practice for anybody?  I've found 
that losing one machine (out of about 100) results in so much db 
thrashing as the keys get repopulated into different places that the 
site becomes basically unusable until enough of the cache has been 
regenerated (5-10 minutes if i'm lucky).

-jsd-