Clearly, with “traditional” RDBMSs, you tend to put a cache “close to” the client. However, I was under the impression that Cassandra nodes could be positioned “close to” their clients, and Cassandra has its own cache (I believe), so how effective would it be to put a cache in front of a cache?
From: Dorian Hoxha [mailto:dorian.ho...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2016 2:52 PM To: user@cassandra.apache.org Subject: Re: Rationale for using Hazelcast in front of Cassandra? Maybe when you can have very hot keys that can give trouble to your 3(replication) cassandra nodes ? Example: why does facebook use memcache ? They certainly have things distributed on thousands of servers. On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 11:40 PM, KARR, DAVID <dk0...@att.com<mailto:dk0...@att.com>> wrote: I've seen use cases that briefly describe using Hazelcast as a "front-end" for Cassandra, perhaps as a cache. This seems counterintuitive to me. Can someone describe to me when this kind of architecture might make sense?
