How does groupcache in Go compare to redis and memcached?

Issue

I was wondering if anyone with real life experience in groupcache and other memory caching tools such as redis and memcached knows how they compare to each other in terms of performance, ease of use, and other areas that are worth mentioning.

The reason I am asking is because I am interested in completely switching over to Go, but I don’t have much experience with it and no experience with groupcache.

Solution

Groupcache is not meant to be a full replacement for Redis or Memcached. Groupcache for example doesn’t support updating an item or deleting it.

It’s useful for “hot” items that you want to cache but are immutable.

Also, compared to Redis, it doesn’t support any of the advanced features that Redis supports because it has a different intended usage scenario.

Unless you have such things, I’d recommend to stick to using Redis or Memcached.

Indeed, if you can trick your implementation into making each item immutable by following some logic (maybe address the items by a key which includes a timestamp?) then you might be able to work-around it but I guess it might be too much work compared to just using other solutions.

Hope this helps.

Answered By – dlsniper

Answer Checked By – Dawn Plyler (GoLangFix Volunteer)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.