JonB wrote:
By the sound of it, memcached will work - it'll cost me network calls
(but not to the MySQL server) - the only remaining doubt I have is
over the data being stored in it.
If you are already doing network calls to mysql it is a pretty sure
thing that memcached will not be slower than even a 'fast' mysql
response on cache hits.
Not a lot of our data can be agregated before being cached - so we're
left again, looking in the cache for very small bits of data (a few
bytes to a few hundred bytes).
I'll have to sit down and work out where in the application it's
likely to sit, and whether the cost of the network calls etc. to get a
few bytes, is actually worth it.
I guess having a 'localhost' cache would avoid some of the overhead,
as would UDP.
Memcache will be somewhat slower than caching in the app's memory, but
you trade that off for having to duplicate the RAM and initial fetch for
each server and having the items expire at different times on each server.
--
Les Mikesell
[email protected]
