Hmm that article states that Cachex is only a local cache but it supports distributed caching as well
Yeah, good catch, apparently since v3.1 supports distributed features. But overall, the main argument is not only about if the cache is distributed or not. The existing libraries are particular cache implementations, not a caching framework which is what Nebulex aims to be, be able to craft different caching topologies and patterns using different cache stores. But all these things are covered in the blog post.
It’s not super featureful, like I don’t know if it’s pluggable, but it supports cross BEAM node cache storage via sharding, so Nebulex is more capable if you have an external store
Well, I’m not sure what you meant, but Nebulex supports distributed caching by means of its distributed build-in adapter (among others) which implementing sharding (under-the-hood). Therefore, it is not necessary an external store, it is optional, and that’s the point, Nebulex doesn’t depend on an external store or any other particular cache implementation. The idea is that you can setup the adapters you need and deploy the topologies you require for your specific use case. For example, a multilevel topology where the L1 is the local cache using the built-in local adapter or even Cachex (in the roadmap there is an adapter for cachex), the L2 could be a distributed cache (using the built-in adapter), the L3 could be an external store like Redis, and so on and so forth.
I wonder how they benchmark, I’d love to see both tested with their full feature sets
Yeah, both Nebulex built-in adapters and Caches have benchmarks, you can run those benchmarks on each project and compare. But again, that’s not the point, it doesn’t matter which one is faster. The purpose of Nebulex is not to be faster than Cachex or any other cache, actually they complement each other, Cachex is a amazing cache library, and you can use it with Nebulex as well. The idea of Nebulex is to provide a caching framework you can play with, craft your own caches using the implementations you want, etc.
