locked
Does Azure VM instance size matter with LOCAL caching? RRS feed

  • Question

  • I would like to get the maximum azure cahcing option ( 4GB cache for $325 ) and then enable the LOCAL CACHE of the VM Instance.

    Is there any advantage of selecting larger VM Instance sizes?  Does an Extra Large instance have higher available  LOCAL cache than say a Medium Azure Instance?

     

    If there is a difference are there some numbers out there anyone knows? I cant find how much local Cache these instance sizes provides.

    Thanks in advance for any info :)

     

    Monday, August 15, 2011 4:56 PM

Answers

  • Hi DaDetective,

    The local cache size of Azure AppFabric caching does not have direct relationship with the RAM size (though of course local cache size should be less than RAM size). There is no cache size (memory usage) limitation in local caching but there is an object count concept. The default value is 10,000 objects regardless how much memory it uses.

    It is configurable by localCache element. If you want to configure a large object count, considering the average object size, you can estimate how much RAM it may consume.

    <dataCacheClient name="default">
        <localCache isEnabled="true" objectCount="1100" />
    </dataCacheClient>

    Further reading: Enable Windows Server AppFabric Local Cache (XML)Introducing the Windows Azure AppFabric Caching Service.

    Thanks.


    Wenchao Zeng
    Please mark the replies as answers if they help or unmark if not.
    If you have any feedback about my replies, please contact msdnmg@microsoft.com.
    Microsoft One Code Framework
    • Marked as answer by Wenchao Zeng Monday, August 22, 2011 2:19 AM
    Tuesday, August 16, 2011 7:11 AM

All replies

  • The differences, including memory, between the various instance sizes are described in this post.
    Monday, August 15, 2011 6:13 PM
    Answerer
  • I was hoping to look more for numbers relating to "local cache" on each instance instead of RAM. 

    I don think that breakdown goes into local cache amounts on each instance, it only shows the RAM available.

     

     

    Monday, August 15, 2011 6:33 PM
  • Hi DaDetective,

    The local cache size of Azure AppFabric caching does not have direct relationship with the RAM size (though of course local cache size should be less than RAM size). There is no cache size (memory usage) limitation in local caching but there is an object count concept. The default value is 10,000 objects regardless how much memory it uses.

    It is configurable by localCache element. If you want to configure a large object count, considering the average object size, you can estimate how much RAM it may consume.

    <dataCacheClient name="default">
        <localCache isEnabled="true" objectCount="1100" />
    </dataCacheClient>

    Further reading: Enable Windows Server AppFabric Local Cache (XML)Introducing the Windows Azure AppFabric Caching Service.

    Thanks.


    Wenchao Zeng
    Please mark the replies as answers if they help or unmark if not.
    If you have any feedback about my replies, please contact msdnmg@microsoft.com.
    Microsoft One Code Framework
    • Marked as answer by Wenchao Zeng Monday, August 22, 2011 2:19 AM
    Tuesday, August 16, 2011 7:11 AM
  • Hi,

    I will mark the reply as answer. If you find it no help, please feel free to unmark it and follow up.

    Thanks.


    Wenchao Zeng
    Please mark the replies as answers if they help or unmark if not.
    If you have any feedback about my replies, please contact msdnmg@microsoft.com.
    Microsoft One Code Framework
    Monday, August 22, 2011 2:19 AM
  • Hi,

    I will mark the reply as answer. If you find it no help, please feel free to unmark it and follow up.

    Thanks.


    Wenchao Zeng
    Please mark the replies as answers if they help or unmark if not.
    If you have any feedback about my replies, please contact msdnmg@microsoft.com.
    Microsoft One Code Framework


    Yes thank you for your reply it was helpful.  I just now got back to it ( as i saved the link for future reference ).

    Thanks again for the response !

    Saturday, September 24, 2011 3:18 PM