[Mongrel] Mongrel and MemcacheSessionStore

Michael Moen mi-mongrel at moensolutions.com
Fri Feb 2 13:06:09 EST 2007

On Feb 2, 2007, at 11:26 AM, Zed A. Shaw wrote:

> On Fri, 02 Feb 2007 14:43:29 +0000
> Tiago Macedo <tmacedo at student.dei.uc.pt> wrote:
>> I was wondering if this was a known issue or if anyone else had this
>> problem before. Maybe switching to Mongrel 1.0.1 with fastthread  
>> solves
>> this?
> Do you have log files and exception traces to look at?  Without a  
> stack trace showing memcache getting suddenly disconnected it's  
> difficult to figure out what could be wrong.  Try with 1.0.1 and  
> fastthread, and then if not file a bug.  The problem is there's not  
> much of a reason why fastcgi vs. Mongrel would be the difference.  
> The problem you describe sounds more like a problem of memcache  
> storage levels.  Are you able to see how full the memcache is when  
> this is happening?

I can vouch for the fact that Mongrel and memcache sessions play just  
fine together. JibJab has been using them for about 6 months without  
issue, though they do have a truck load of memcache storage. the  
amount of data stored in session is also very small, user_id and  
string or 2 when needed.

> As an aside, I haven't found a compelling reason to put sessions  
> into a memcache.

They are doing it because there is still enough legacy .NET code  
that's not using memcache to keep the DB pretty busy, but under  
normal conditions keeping sessions in the DB is a better choice as it  
will survive a memcache restart.


More information about the Mongrel-users mailing list