Apache Ignite VS Apache Traffic Server

Ignite works as you describe: https://ignite.apache.org/ I wouldn't really recommend this approach, I would think more in terms of subscriptions and topics and less of a 'database'. - Source: Hacker News / about 2 years ago

Last days, I started using Apache Ignite as a cache strategy for some applications. Apache Ignite is an open-source In-Memory Data Grid, distributed database, caching, and high-performance computing platform. Source: over 2 years ago

Apache Traffic Server: https://trafficserver.apache.org/ Here’s how they use it along with Varnish: https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Caching_overview. - Source: Hacker News / over 1 year ago

The LARGE majority of CDNs use either Apache Traffic Server (https://trafficserver.apache.org/) or Nginx for their cache webserver, so the mechanisms used are pretty easy to find if you look through the docs. Source: almost 2 years ago

Apache Traffic Server (no relation to Apache itself) would be an excellent option: https://trafficserver.apache.org/. - Source: Hacker News / over 2 years ago

We have choices. We could use Varnish (scripting! Edge side includes! PHK blog posts!). We could use Apache Traffic Server (being the only new team this year to use ATS!). Or we could use NGINX (we're already running it!). The only certainty is that you'll come to hate whichever one you pick. Try them all and pick the one you hate the least. - Source: dev.to / almost 3 years ago

I was curious if I could find anything out about their stack. Turns out they are using something called Apache Traffic Server[0]. > Formerly a commercial product, Yahoo! Donated it to the Apache Foundation [0] http://trafficserver.apache.org/. - Source: Hacker News / about 3 years ago