I've been using memcache on my server for at least a few months now and I'm quite pleased on how it makes my forum faster. So, do you use memcache?
I use XCache instead of memcached. Memcached provides a better performance boost on a multiple-server setup whereas XCache performs better on a single server setup. FastCGI + XCache has worked really well for us.
Are you on a multiple web server setup? If you're only on a single box, by using memcached you are most likely reducing your performance. Memcached is slower than XCache's data store.
Yes, we run multiple servers. Additionally, XCache's var engine is harder to manage as opposed to memcached so it's easier to run into memory issues with XCache when used, for example, for full page caching. This is based on our experience and may vary with your setup/system.
Hmmm... I am out of the game I'd say, since I have no idea what that is. I'll look into it, I'm trying to get myself back at the track. Anyone cares to explain in simple details?
If I'm not wrong memcache and other cache-related software is meant to improve the server speed as pages are cached for fast rendering when a surfer visits your site. I must say that I have never liked to run cache systems of any kind because I feel like the surfer never can see the last updated page, but the last cached page, which is not good when you are working on the server and doing changes every now and then. Of course, some scripts allow to set an expiration date to get the cache flushed and rebuilt, but I prefer other methods to optimize the loading time of my sites,
Oh I think I know what you are talking about. I think I've seen a few examples here and there. Surely that can be good if it improves sites load time, but not being able to see the last updated page is quite a price (feature to sacrifice). I guess it just depends on the nature of your site.
Unfortunately, the moment you serve millions of pages per month you kinda have to make a few sacrifices. Besides, a minute or two of cache refresh time is just about right for anyone to read through a page so it doesn't really affect the "freshness" factor that much. Of course logged in members don't get cached pages.
I use to use this service on a old site I use to run. The members didn't like it and visitors hated it to such a degree that they emailed me to let me know! I would rather stray away from this because users don't want to see old irrelevant content.
