4 ms·
Server Density removes Memcached because it's "too slow"
- justinsb 14y agoWhile I do agree that a good database can replace memcache in certain circumstances, isn't a 24ms response time from memcache a pretty good indication that something is seriously wrong there? I'd expect <1ms, if your network allows you to get that from Mongo
- relix 14y agoIt seems to me that the 24ms was the whole process they were using, i.e. put data in memcached, take data out using a seperate process, and put data in mongodb; versus putting the data straight into mongodb.
- 1SaltwaterC 14y agoNope. From those metrics, Memcache is using all that time by itself. New Relic breaks down the network map based on distinct services. The database layer has a separate entry.
- rfurmani 14y agoI had a similar issue with my Django project on Heroku. My site performance went down once I enabled memcache, almost entirely due to latency (going up to 100ms at times). This is one of the reasons why I ended up moving off of Heroku and onto an EC2 instance: now I have full control of my stack, I can run what I want locally on the server, and I'm getting much better performance (nginx+gunicorn+memcached+django+johnnycache+rds)
- 1SaltwaterC 14y agoI'm not affiliated with the OP. I maintain my own stack on EC2 due to very specific application requirements. However, something is suspicious if the latency goes up so much due to Memcache alone.
- sauravc 14y agoThe title is pretty stupid not to mention misleading. 24ms to talk to memcache means "they're doing it wrong".