Comments on: Tokyo Cabinet vs Memcached

By: tokyocabinet 使用 « Neo的技术笔记

tokyocabinet 使用 « Neo的技术笔记 — Sat, 26 Feb 2011 13:31:17 +0000

[...] 参照 :Tokyo Cabinet vs Memcached [...]

By: Bucket o’ Links / April 2009 < Code Monkey Island

Bucket o’ Links / April 2009 < Code Monkey Island — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 03:13:55 +0000

[...] (respectively). This came out of Japanese social network mixi.jp. Tokyo is file-backed but is nearly as fast as memcached for most needs. We’ve been using this for the last couple weeks to store long-lived cache [...]

By: Mitchell Hashimoto

Mitchell Hashimoto — Sat, 04 Apr 2009 00:00:50 +0000

@Ilya:

Here is a little paragraph on expiring records with TT:

http://tokyocabinet.sourceforge.net/tyrantdoc/#luaext

By: Joshua Hull

Joshua Hull — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 01:34:58 +0000

Hey Mike. tokyo-cache-cow does indeed support all of the memcache protocol, it does seem much slower than I would expect. I’m not sure if the problem lies in the memcache client or something with event machine (because when I’ve benchmarked tc itself, everything is fine), but I’m vowing to get to the bottom of this.

The other part of the memcache protocol to implement is the UDP side, and thats on the books for tokyo cache cow as well.

By: Ilya Grigorik

Ilya Grigorik — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 23:09:50 +0000

Mike, another project to check out if you’re comparing TC / Memcache is tokyo-cache-cow by joshbuddy. While TC doesn’t have native TTL support, it does allow for doing substring matching, which is pretty nice.

Also, it is possible to implement TTL’s in TC with a simple Lua script (I wish I could find my bookmark for that, but can’t… It already exists though).