On 8/25/07, Cliff Wells <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 2007-08-25 at 20:24 +0300, Pekka Jääskeläinen wrote:
> > On 8/25/07, Ben Bangert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >         I'd highly suggest memcached rather than database backend.
> >         It's easy
> >         to setup, and of course, very fast. :)
> >
> > Yes, but as far as I know, memcached objects can be always replaced,
> > that is, you cannot define an object to be persistent, can you? Thus,
> > one
> > also needs to back up the session data to a persistent storage so it
> > does
> > not get replaced when the cache fills up.
> >
>
> This is a good point and is reiterated here:
>
> http://www.socialtext.net/memcached/index.cgi?sessions
>

Well if you have a cache that fills up with active sessions then you
have a pretty huge problem, because your performance characteristics
are going to be pretty bad at that point. You shouldn't really need
db-backed ephemeral sessions, unless you need to have the flexibility
to restart your memcached servers without interruption.

However, if you're not doing a lot with sessions I'd have to suggest
storing your state directly in cookies, since they're usually
equivalent with sessions but don't require any server-side state.
Though of course you should use HMAC or the like to guarantee that
your server generated that cookie's contents.

-bob

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"pylons-discuss" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to