Peter Leonard wrote: > Rose::DB::Object::Cached would be a likely choice, except we're looking > at a multi-server cache - as Jonathan mentioned above, memcached is our > intended target.
Sure, but it's probably easier to modify the storage part of Rose::DB::Object::Cached to hit memcached than it is to start from scratch. Incidentally, in my tests, memcached wasn't faster than MySQL at simple primary key fetches. You might get the same result by just replicating your db and using the slave for your reads. - Perrin ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Rose-db-object mailing list Rose-db-object@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rose-db-object
