Just 1 copy. If you lose a server, you lose its data. It's cache, not a database.
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 3:29 PM, Phillip B Oldham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > Am I right in thinking that memcached splits records between servers, > without any replication/duplication, and that if a server were to go > down for any reason the records on that server would be lost? > > My original understanding was that the memcached servers would make > duplicates in different locations, or shard the data in some way so > that if a server was lost the records it contained would be > recoverable. Someone has challenged this thinking, and I'd like to > ensure my understanding is correct. > > Can someone enlighten me as to what the correct working state is? >
