On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 10:19 AM, Ryan Daum <r...@thimbleware.com> wrote: > Are these applications using memcached for caching or for something else? > I don't see the point in putting Cassandra in as a level 1 or 2 cache > replacement? Especially given as it does not support any reasonable > expiration policy that would be of use in those circumstances. > Ryan
You're right that without cache expiration, it's of questionable value for page/fragment caches. I was just curious about what methods are used out in the real world, so I looked at some big apps that I know use memcached. As far as client libraries go, I can attest that in Ruby at least, the memcached client library is vastly faster than the thrift one. I don't know about avro. In my tests with Ruby, the marshalling was dominating the networking in Cassandra performance. 25% of the time in my benchmark was used by a function called "write_byte" (which is implemented in Ruby!). I would be happy to hear that I'm Doing Something Wrong, but I think it's just a consequence of the thrift protocol and the client implementation. I have no idea whether Avro is better. I'm not sure if it works well enough to be tested yet... Paul Prescod
