new | show | ask | jobs Github

tempest_ 2 hours ago

I stopped using memcached a decade a go in favour of Redis and now use valkey.

Never felt the need to go back to memcached except when a legacy dependency needed it.

▲

jimbokun 2 hours ago | parent [-]

OK.

What do you think of the argument made in the article?

▲

tempest_ an hour ago | parent [-]

I don't want my cache to silently fail.

Clustering redis is not that hard even if you do it manually and I have only had to do it once.

I never use redis persistence and have a max size set with LRU or whatever the application requires.

With memcached I remember having to mess around the LD_LIBRARY path to link whatever python module I was using at the time

▲

crabmusket 38 minutes ago | parent [-]

> silently fail

Mature ops would be tracking cache hit ratios right?

It sounds like memcached would be really good in a use case where you really just need an optional stateless pure cache with absolutely zero rope to hang yourself on. A use case where "cache hit ratio" is the goal, not "fiddly in-memory data store".

	▲	tempest_ 18 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> Mature ops would be tracking cache hit ratios right? Sure, and sentry integrates well with redis in python which is what I use primarily with redis. I don't think memcached is bad, I just think its old and industry has moved to redis because it offers more while covering the previous use case. Calling redis fiddly is a mischaracterization. For many use cases I have not had to think more than 30s to setup redis. (also when I say redis I mean Valkey at this point, even if they are starting to diverge)