On Wednesday 11 March 2009, Iñaki Baz Castillo wrote:
Hi, I read this in the documentation:
-----------
This module is an addition to the existing htable functionality, not a
replacement. In smaller architectures or installations where only one
instance needs access to the hash table this module is easier to setup, as
no dedicated server needs to be provided. But when a distributed storage
facilility is necessary, or one want to separate the storage from the SIP
server, this module could be used.
------------
Perhaps you could clarify in which case is better using htable or
memcached? I understand that htable (not distributed but in local memory)
is more suitable for a simple installation while memcached allow varios
servers accessing to the same storege.
If I'm right, sould the text be a bit improved? :)
Hi Iñaki,
thanks. Yes, you're right, this text could be improved. :-) I'll rephrase it a
bit.
Cheers,
Henning