I've been working a lot on the performance aspects of Dynomite and I think it is a better solution now than memcachedb. One big issue with memcachedb is that i

I've been working a lot on the performance aspects of Dynomite and I think it is a better solution now than memcachedb. One big issue with memcachedb is that it leaves replication management completely to the user. So if you want to be able to seamlessly handle machine failure with a high traffic site, you need to do a lot of work to set up replicas, do clever things with DNS, and even then you won't get a guarantee of availability for that data. Dynomite handles all of that transparently, plus it isn't tied to a single storage engine. So that you can use a different storage engine based on the type of load you plan on generating. The code is here: http://github.com/cliffmoon/dynomite http://github.com/cliffmoon/dynomite