You could also use VMware or something similar
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 9:37 AM, Walt Crosby <[email protected]> wrote: > > I agree. We did that. The windows Server is a joke -- since it is > currently limited to 64MB in Service mode (I'm sure this could be modified, > but I don't have the time to find the magic key). > > Further, the incessant reboots from Windows Updates was enough to make it > worthwhile for us to get a Linux box. We did just what you suggested -- > installed it on Ubuntu. We've got it set up for 3 GB, and it hasn't had to > be rebooted in over a month. Since our application is caching Lat/Longs for > Reverse Geocoding -- we don't have to worry that much about changing data -- > our default TTL is 180 days. We are approaching an 80% hit rate. > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Ray Krueger > Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2009 9:52 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Memcached 1.3 or above for windows. > > >> I am using memcached in windows platform. >> I am using memcached version 1.2.6. >> The problem here is that I am not able to use BINARY_PROTOCOL option >> with this server as it works with only server version 1.3 or above. >> Appreciate if any body can send me the link to download memcached >> server version 1.3 for windows. >> I am also open for the subversion link to download and compile it. > > If you really want to run the latest and greatest edge stuff, you really > should just stand up a linux box. It's dead simple to stand up an Ubuntu > Linux box and run memcached. You can put that expensive Windows license to > use elsewhere. > > >
