(2010/02/05 11:40), KaiGai Kohei wrote:
> (2010/02/04 18:32), Toru Maesaka wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> Thanks for your proof of concept.
>>
>>> From observing your patch, you should be able to develop this as an
>> engine once we make changes to the modular engine subsystem based on
>> your feedback. Your
(2010/02/04 18:32), Toru Maesaka wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Thanks for your proof of concept.
>
>> From observing your patch, you should be able to develop this as an
> engine once we make changes to the modular engine subsystem based on
> your feedback. Your feedback on get() being called inside another
>
(2010/02/04 18:32), Toru Maesaka wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Thanks for your proof of concept.
>
>> From observing your patch, you should be able to develop this as an
> engine once we make changes to the modular engine subsystem based on
> your feedback. Your feedback on get() being called inside another
>
I can safely say it will work. Yes, you will loose a bit of
performance possibilities with the over head of virtualization, but if
your going virtual with everything else it just makes it easier to
manage and bring on more Memcached machines as needed. The one thing
to make sure of is to spreed you
Hi!
Thanks for your proof of concept.
>From observing your patch, you should be able to develop this as an
engine once we make changes to the modular engine subsystem based on
your feedback. Your feedback on get() being called inside another
function is a good point (thanks!) and I believe some o
