On Thursday 06 May 2010 23:27:46 Patryk Zawadzki wrote: > 2010/5/6 Radosław Zieliński <rade...@gmail.com>: > > 2010/5/6 Elan Ruusamäe <g...@delfi.ee>: > >> what you think about repcached http://repcached.lab.klab.org/ > >> should we create new package, or just patch our memcached? > > > > New. Leave this kind of patching to the upstream. > > You can't get this functionality without a performance hit.
yet it's not enabled by default, but via -x and -X option keeping it separate package is burden for maintaining it (at least for me), i.e duplicating the initscripts and config, apparently need to do some extra work not to conflict with paths if memcached is installed to same host as well. yet i'm not sure how evasive it is to the core usage, few if-statements in code really such a notable perforamance drop? yet separate package allows you clearly distinguish is it upstream memcached or rep-cache patched memcached. so far i added as bcond to memcached.spec as it's against my free will to duplicate code. -- glen _______________________________________________ pld-devel-en mailing list pld-devel-en@lists.pld-linux.org http://lists.pld-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/pld-devel-en
