Unfortunately most client libraries perform server selection slightly
differently from each other. It might be possible to get the same
distribution if you use the naive server selection in both, and setup your
list of servers the same way.
On the other hand, does it really matter? Changing your
Henrik Schröder wrote:
Unfortunately most client libraries perform server selection slightly
differently from each other. It might be possible to get the same
distribution if you use the naive server selection in both, and setup
your list of servers the same way.
On the other hand, does it
The syntax differences don't lend themselves to being swapped out that
easily. Unless you are going to do a full code roll out to one set of
servers and not another, I don't think this is too easy.
They have different compression settings and I am not sure if they set
the same flag when
Fortunately, way back when we started using memcache I wrote a wrapper
for it to handle some of the more tedious stuff for me automatically.
All our code uses that wrapper class, so I just had to change the one
class to swap out extensions. :)
Unfortunately in our testing we are seeing some
hey jay,
we both are sailing in same boat!! I am in process of shifting from
pecl/memcache to pecl/memcached too. I have done some testing
yesterday itself, and have some feedback which might help you.
First of all, look very seriously and carefully which hashing policy
you were using(with
