On Sep 20, 8:25 pm, "MikeG." <[email protected]> wrote: > The reason is that my transactions are reading large amount of data > from the DB to generate > a deliverable blob.
All of them all the time? It may be possible to optimize your source for whatever type of efficiency you're seeking (latency? throughput?). > Now, to hold 1TB in memory I need a cluster and not a small one. It only takes 16 64GB nodes to give you 1 TB of RAM. Of course, not all will be usable. It depends on how many objects you plan to have loaded and other overhead. > Also, memcached (the C implementation) has a 1MB record size limit. 1) > What's the reason for that? The limit is configurable, but defaults to 1MB. If you are caching items larger than 1MB, latency is probably not your issue, so memcached may not provide the most benefit. It'll do it, of course, but as you get larger, it starts to be less beneficial than, say, varnish. > 2) Can it be changed (with a hacked private version) -I > 3) Does Jmemcached has the same limit? You should try your design at a smaller scale and see what components benefit you.
