webb.clint at gmail.com
Fri Aug 31 00:54:13 UTC 2007
i use the 'serial number' idea a lot and it works very well. have you
considered using different clusters for each host?
On 8/31/07, dormando <dormando at rydia.net> wrote:
> Sam Washburn wrote:
> > Hello list!
> > I'm wondering if this question has been asked before and hopefully replied
> > to with a good answer :)
> > We have several domains that use the same code base but independent
> > in memcache. The memcache keys I use for each domain are
> > hostname+identifier. One particular function(a user activated feature)
> > radically changes the state of the site and requires a flush so as not to
> > leave traces of the previous state. Our code currently uses flush() to
> > perform this action.
> A few times ;)
> So there are a few proposals to allow more generational caching which
> Dustin pointed to you (wiki it!), but I see an easy route for you.
> If you're interesting in implementing something that's merge-able, I
> don't want to discourage you :) But as an alternative, if you're already
> using hostname+identifier as a key prefix, you can add one more and make
> the whole set "ghetto generational"
> Just add a serial number somewhere (cache it locally, in another key,
> whatever): hostname+id+serial
> User activates feature, serial++, then magically all of their own data
> is gone. The LRU will push it out eventually if needed.
> I ... might've ... put this up an example on the wiki. It's been
> credited to someone else. I'll check and add later if not.
"Be excellent to each other"
More information about the memcached