|
|
|
|
|
by mmcnickle
4741 days ago
|
|
Nowhere is it suggested that this is suitable for uses where you need durability. In fact if you are looking for a library for consistent hashing, I'd assume you'd understand the drawbacks (invalidation on resize). Have you a point other than ranting that this isn't a unicorn? It really bothers me that this is the top comment at the moment. |
|
But a standalone server to talk to other languages such as PHP? Why would I want to add yet another TCP connection, yet another point of failure, and yet another protocol to my software stack when PHP's very own Predis, for example, does consistent hashing just fine while talking to Redis directly? Many other languages like Ruby, Java, and C#/.NET also have Redis clients that support consistent hashing. Sorry Pythonists, everyone else has been having fun with turnkey consistent hashing for 3-4 years already.
Lossless sharding came to mind immediately as a possible benefit of a middle layer, because Redis users have been asking for something like that for ages. When someone says "Redis" and "sharding" in the same breath, I'm sure a lot of people will think "Finally, a way to distribute my larger-than-RAM dataset across multiple machines!" After all, durability is a big deal when it comes to Redis. I'm sorry if my comment came across as rude, but I was honestly quite disappointed because my expectations were probably too high.