Distributed Caching - rahul7838/quora.clone GitHub Wiki
Redis vs Collection framework
Let me compare Redis with in-memory collection frameworks (like Java Collections or Python's built-in data structures) to highlight the key benefits of using Redis:
- Persistence
- Redis can persist data to disk, allowing data to survive system restarts
- Collection frameworks only keep data in memory and lose everything when the application stops
- Distributed Architecture
- Redis acts as a centralized data store accessible by multiple applications/services
- Collection frameworks are limited to a single application's memory space
- Multiple services can share data through Redis without complex synchronization
- Data Structures and Operations
- Redis provides atomic operations for complex data structures (Lists, Sets, Sorted Sets, Hashes)
- Built-in support for operations like INCR/DECR, SET with expiry, etc.
- Collection frameworks require manual implementation of thread-safe operations
- Memory Management
- Redis can handle larger datasets by swapping to disk when needed
- Collection frameworks are limited by available application memory
- Redis provides memory optimization features like key expiration and LRU eviction
- Scalability
- Redis supports clustering for horizontal scaling
- Can handle high concurrent access with better performance
- Collection frameworks scale vertically with application resources
- Caching Use Cases
- Redis excels as a distributed cache with features like TTL
- Built-in support for cache invalidation strategies
- Collection frameworks require manual cache management
- Cross-Language Support
- Redis can be used by applications written in different programming languages
- Collection frameworks are language-specific
- Performance
- Redis is optimized for high-speed operations (100K+ operations/second)
- In-memory access with minimal network overhead
- Collection frameworks may suffer from garbage collection pauses