Brenton Alker wrote:


Which can only really be overcome (I think, if anyone knows better tell
me :P) by only writing to the master. This means the application, or a
proxy for it, must be aware of the master/slave situation. But your
right this doesn't solve the lag problem

Also, the original poster (Masaaki ?) mentioned it was not "not
scalability, or high performance" but redundancy and fail-over. Which
means it would only be used in extreme cases, and you could probably
forgive the cache misses (dependant on application of course)

Is it really worth this effort compared to just distributing the cache across the 2 (or more) servers and making sure your backend data source can handle the load when one of the cache servers is down?

--
  Les Mikesell
   [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Reply via email to