Hacker News Reader

Comment by nerpderp82 | Hacker News Reader

The benchmarks should be against Aerospike or something similar not Redis, as it cooks the results vs what is the current highest performant OSS KV store.

View on HN

Or against https://github.com/dragonflydb/dragonfly.

We posted benchmarks

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/danielesalvatorealbano_cacheg...

Loginwall for me :/

Redis is the product everyone knows? Pick a tool and it is almost a guarantee there is a less well known implementation that is better on dimension X.

Memcached is the usual benchmark target for multi-core Redis-like systems.

Very good point but currently cachegrand doesn't have an interface for memcache, although probably would take about 1 week to implement it.

In general I am pretty sure cachegrand would be faster than memcache easily but I will add it to the todo list as it makes sense.

Thanks for pointing it out!

Aerospike will happily ignore your requests if it feels like. Use it only if you don't care about correctness or losing data.

“In hundreds of tests of SC mode through network partitions, 3.99.1.5 and higher versions have not shown any sign of nonlinearizable histories, lost increments to counters, or lost updates to sets.” – Kyle Kingsbury, Aerospike 3.99.0.3, 12-27-2017

- https://aerospike.com/blog/aerospike-4-strong-consistency-an...

- https://jepsen.io/analyses/aerospike-3-99-0-3

Good for them. We got rid of Aerospike because using it in the "right" way to get data in and out correctly is a pain in the ass and makes everything slow.

Trust me as a committer it smokes aerospike and dragonflydb.

Dragonflydb also break Redis license big time.

Ambiguous use of "it" there. I don't understand what you mean.

Well, we have 3 things it could mean: Cachegrand, Aerospike and dragonflydb.

Since the comment says "Trust me as a committer it smokes aerospike and dragonflydb." we can rule out aerospike and dragonflydb, which leaves us with "it" being Cachegrand. Ain't that deep.

Why would it be obvious we should implicitly trust (since all they said is "trust me") a committer to a project that their project is better (in any dimension) than competitors to their project?

That didn't make sense to me so I assumed they must not be a contributor to cachegrand.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com