On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 08:20:14 -0700 "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There are some potential disadvantages of a system like this. It > fundamentally violates shared nothing, which means you cannot scale to > infinity with this, but it can likely scale to somewhere around 95th > percentile of all internet websites...
That's another point I forgot to make: this should be a last resort. I hate the word "should" but really, if you haven't tried to tune up a basic shared-nothing design to the fastest you can before running toward insanely complex caching designs then you've gone in the wrong direction. Many, many times I've seen simple little changes and tweaks with bits of strategic rework and caching boost a site that had a good initial shared-nothing design way beyond what a heavy shared cache site could pull off. In other words, no amount of distributed caching can help a poorly designed system. -- Zed A. Shaw, MUDCRAP-CE Master Black Belt Sifu http://www.zedshaw.com/ http://www.awprofessional.com/title/0321483502 -- The Mongrel Book http://mongrel.rubyforge.org/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Deploying Rails" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-deployment@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-deployment?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
