If your stored data is small,i think you may try xmemcached, http://code.google.com/p/xmemcached/
2009/12/10 Adam Lee <[email protected]> > Spy performs *much* better for us, but our needs might be different > from yours. We're running in a _highly_ concurrent environment-- most > of our front-end machines are 32 or 64 core SunFire CMT machines. > (T1000, T5120, etc) > > But, yes, if you search the archives, there has been some extensive > performance testing in this arena. Start here: > > http://blogs.sun.com/elambert/entry/memcached_java_client_performance_on > > http://blogs.sun.com/elambert/entry/memcached_java_client_performance_on1 > > > I also find the Spy client to be much nice to work with at the API > level. Plus, I love asynchronous operations. > > -- > awl > -- 庄晓丹
