3 ms·
Sorry, I stopped reading at 10K rps and p50 of 5ms. In this day and age these numbers are pretty bad, especially for a cache where presumably all accesses are c
by sulam 11y ago
Sorry, I stopped reading at 10K rps and p50 of 5ms. In this day and age these numbers are pretty bad, especially for a cache where presumably all accesses are constant time. Every single caching solution listed out-performs this handily.
- delroth 11y agoI had the same feeling when reading this article. That's nothing like "high performance", especially the 5ms median latency. memcached is a whole two orders of magnitude lower in terms of median latency.