﻿<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Ayende @ Rahien</title><link>http://ayende.com</link><description>Ayende @ Rahien</description><copyright>Copyright (C) Ayende Rahien  2004 - 2021 (c) 2026</copyright><ttl>60</ttl><item><title>dru commented on Distributed cache for the CLR</title><description>Thanks for the heads up Ayende. Nice stuff to read.
  
-d
</description><link>http://ayende.com/3165/distributed-cache-for-the-clr#comment5</link><guid>http://ayende.com/3165/distributed-cache-for-the-clr#comment5</guid><pubDate>Tue, 26 Feb 2008 01:12:08 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Ayende Rahien commented on Distributed cache for the CLR</title><description>Nick,
  
Ping Sriram, ask him how you can help him
</description><link>http://ayende.com/3165/distributed-cache-for-the-clr#comment4</link><guid>http://ayende.com/3165/distributed-cache-for-the-clr#comment4</guid><pubDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2008 18:58:54 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Luke Breuer commented on Distributed cache for the CLR</title><description>I really like your emphasis on failure scenarios.  I think I would word it like this: it is easier to determine how failure is flowing through .NET code than most other code.  Now, this is clearly based on my experience.  I do, however, see quite the trend in people liking how .NET deals with failure.
  
  
Now, if people would only document how failure flows through their system, providing information that stack traces do not...  (Like the "why", as opposed to the "what".)
</description><link>http://ayende.com/3165/distributed-cache-for-the-clr#comment3</link><guid>http://ayende.com/3165/distributed-cache-for-the-clr#comment3</guid><pubDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2008 18:55:11 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Sriram Krishnan commented on Distributed cache for the CLR</title><description>Thanks for the post (and the mail!). I'll admit up front that it is a *big* stretch to think of Cacheman as being anywhere close to being on par with Memcached. One is a stable, well-tested piece of code and the other is something I've thrown together over a few weekends :).
  
  
It might get there eventually - but its a long road!
</description><link>http://ayende.com/3165/distributed-cache-for-the-clr#comment2</link><guid>http://ayende.com/3165/distributed-cache-for-the-clr#comment2</guid><pubDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2008 17:03:03 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Nick Aceves commented on Distributed cache for the CLR</title><description>I started a project like that once too.  I was able to get somewhere in the area of 10,000 requests/second without any optimization at all.  I would really like to see something like Memcached that's built on top of the CLR, and would even be willing to devote significant time to such a project.
  
  
It would be even cooler if the server supported the Memcached protocol, which would allow it to act as a drop-in replacement for Memcached.
</description><link>http://ayende.com/3165/distributed-cache-for-the-clr#comment1</link><guid>http://ayende.com/3165/distributed-cache-for-the-clr#comment1</guid><pubDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2008 16:56:18 GMT</pubDate></item></channel></rss>