LAVIK / BLOG
Explore use case at Lavik.
FEATURED · IN DEPTH
Why keep buying servers for RAM? Lavik combines NVMe SSD capacity with throughput above Redis on DRAM. Explore the architecture, benchmarks and economics of a 300-to-3 consolidation.
Read the article
An NVMe-backed activity history can outgrow RAM while its API still returns small pages. Evaluate Redis client compatibility at the response boundary: decoding, range semantics, cancellation, and slow consumers.
A hypothetical image-processing queue shows why replay retention, pending deliveries, and physical storage need separate budgets—and how Lavik’s NVMe-backed Streams support that design.
A catalog refresh must remove obsolete fields as well as update values. Use that application contract to guide a first Lavik evaluation, with package and storage choices supporting the design.
A migration can copy every value correctly and still keep stale data alive too long. Use a TTL-sensitive cache to define compatibility, expiry validation, latency acceptance, and a clean fallback.
A packed timeline cache shows how Lavik’s NVMe values and segmented Strings can support larger objects while keeping selected reads and updates local.
A hypothetical page-rendering service shows how command fan-out, response bytes, independent arrivals, and background refreshes change the meaning of Lavik’s benchmark throughput.
A migration rehearsal should prove what happens after Lavik accepts new writes: how to validate the data, judge latency, and return to the source without silently losing changes.
Moving reconstructable session context to SSD changes the capacity budget. TTL visibility, index removal, physical reclamation, and authoritative login state still need separate decisions.
Lavik