All,
We are implementing a memcached backed cache for one our high
performance eCommerce application and we are noticing the following
performance pattern during our initial performance tests. I would like
to know from the group if any one has concrete data that you can share
regarding the perform
...@gmail.com
Sent: Tue, December 8, 2009 4:51:39 PM
Subject: Memcached 1.2.8 performance with Whalin, Spy client variants.
All,
We are implementing a memcached backed cache for one our high
performance eCommerce application and we are noticing the following
performance pattern during our initial
On Dec 8, 4:51 pm, iamthat wrote:
> 1. We ran some performance tests with simple Java objects (approx 2 KB
> size) with the above setup and we notice that Whalin 1.3.2 is
> performing better than other client variants. This is contrary to our
> original expectation that later version of Whalin a
Spy performs *much* better for us, but our needs might be different
from yours. We're running in a _highly_ concurrent environment-- most
of our front-end machines are 32 or 64 core SunFire CMT machines.
(T1000, T5120, etc)
But, yes, if you search the archives, there has been some extensive
perfo
If your stored data is small,i think you may try xmemcached,
http://code.google.com/p/xmemcached/
2009/12/10 Adam Lee
> Spy performs *much* better for us, but our needs might be different
> from yours. We're running in a _highly_ concurrent environment-- most
> of our front-end machines are 32
