Is myspace using memcache?

a. a at
Thu Jun 21 01:47:56 UTC 2007


I'm running and developing which is Hungary's largest  
blog hosting service. (~50k blogs, ~20k updates frequently). It's  
developed in ASP.NET 2.0.

It has a templating system similar to MovableType but all content is  
generated on-the-fly when requested (like in WordPress).

The whole sytem is running on a 2.0Ghz Xeon, 3Gb RAM + a separated DB  
server. Memcached is running on a spare webserver and it has 1Gb RAM  

We have ~180-250 page impressions a day, but these are only the  
content pages. So compared to "international" sites it's not so much,  
but even here memcached can help a lot.

These hits put a moderate load onto my db server (but it's mitigated  
by an in-memory entity cache), but  interpreting the templates and  
generating the pages took up a lot of CPU time.

So, i started to cache
  - the compiled templates
  - all of the content (with a 10-30-300 min timeout depending on the  
content type)

All of these are stored in memcached, and I'm pretty impressed with  
it. Before switching to memcached I used the file system for caching  
the stuff, and the rough testing show ~200% percent improvement in  
throughput (and ~800-900% compared to the "non-caching" version).  
PLease note, these numbers are not "official" and very application  
specific; when I have some free time I'll create some benchmarks, and  
will post it.

I have to mention that I wrote a client for myself because I did not  
like the currently available .NET version. I found it unnecessarily  
complicated and parts of it show that it' was not developed for .net  
but just ported from Java. (I can release it after I cleaned up the  
code a little bit, and if there is demand.)

Just to sum up: I like memcached very much ;], and it helps a lot.

If you have specific questions, feel free to ask.


On Jun 21, 2007, at 2:51 AM, KevinImNotSpacey wrote:

> Yup, thanks mike, I couldn't agree more.  Facebook is just  
> awesome.  I only really asked about myspace because I know they are  
> a microsoft shop and therefore another website that is MS  
> technology based using memcache would help just as much.  Thinking  
> on it now I should have posed the question: What MS Tech based  
> companies are using memcache?
> I love memcached myself, it is so easy and powerful.  And yes I  
> appreciate Steve's posts about Facebook and how they are using  
> memcached, the information is very helpful.
> I've got the win32 binaries working with the .NET client tools from  
> the danga website.  It all looks to work just as good as the *nix  
> versions, does anyone have any experiences to the contrary?
> thanks again!
> Kevin
> On 6/20/07, mike <mike503 at> wrote:
> On 6/20/07, KevinImNotSpacey <kevin.amerson at> wrote:
> > I recently joined a .NET shop and we're looking at large scale  
> websites on
> > MS platforms and what technologies they're using to scale out their
> > websites.  Myspace was at the top of the list for .NET sites.   
> Any details
> > are greatly appreciated.
> myspace should not be used as a technical model for anything.
> imho, with as much capital as they should be able to use, the
> inconsistent and completely buggy interface is uncalled for -
> especially going on for this many years.
> facebook would be a much better model. not only is their site clean,
> consistent, (and uses memcached i might add) but they expose APIs now
> and seem to generally know their technical stuff. exposing APIs in my
> mind is the next step when you have successfully been able to please
> users with your frontend interface. (some people may disagree, saying
> APIs are nice because other people can make their own interfaces and
> you don't have to change yours)
> to me myspace was built not to scale properly and ever since has been
> struggling to do anything to support the load. i mean come on - it
> started with coldfusion. did they really expect to be one of the
> busiest sites on the net starting with that? :)
> i really don't think they've put in enough funding or the proper
> resources from what it seems like, unless they have a secret
> completely rewritten version in the works.
> not only does facebook use memcached, but steve is one of the most
> active posters it seems and him/the team he works with has made
> numerous improvements and i'm quite sure runs one of the largest (if
> not the largest) memcached clusters anyone has ever claimed that i
> have seen.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

More information about the memcached mailing list