There are no answers to your questions, because that architecture is wrong, memcached is the wrong tool for the job, and what you want to achieve cannot be done.
Memcached is a distributed cache, but your existing architecture seems to treat it as a distributed replicated datastore, and memcached is not one of those and cannot work as such. You have to replace it with one of those. There are plenty to choose from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributed_data_store /Henrik On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 10:29 AM, Kiran Kumar <krn1...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi , > > It seems that you are quite upset with my postings . > I am asking because i am working on a existing architecture , and i need > to follow the things as per now . > > > On Saturday, 27 October 2012 13:47:40 UTC+5:30, Dormando wrote: >> >> Hi! >> >> I really hate to do this, but you're really off topic. You've been >> selectively accepting advice from the mailing list for weeks now, and >> making thread after thread. >> >> You have only vaguely stated your project requirements. >> >> You have ignored the want (or need) to actually properly test your own >> application. >> >> You seem insistant on bending memcached into your requirements. >> >> You've said: >> >> 1) I want two servers to scale memcached. >> >> 2) I need two servers for redundancy. >> >> You don't need two servers to scale memcached. I've tried to explain this >> before. Memcached is going to be faster than your application. >> >> If losing a memcached instance causes data loss, DO NOT USE IT. I cannot >> emphasize this enough. There are reasons upon reasons why memcached does >> not work the way you want it to, and you seem to be slowly finding out >> all >> of these cases for yourself. >> >> Please stop wasting our time. If you continue to ignore the community's >> help, I'm just going to have to block you from the mailing list. We've >> given you a lot of solid advice and I'm afraid you're going to discourage >> people by asking more questions. If you have questions along the lines of >> what people are saying to you, please address them directly instead of >> ignoring them and asking more off-topic questions. >> >> Thanks, and my apologies, >> -Dormando >> >> On Sat, 27 Oct 2012, Kiran Kumar wrote: >> >> > Hi , >> > >> > I have Two Memcache Servers set up for my Application as shown below >> > >> > String location = "10.1.1.1:11211 10.1.1.2:11211"; >> > MemcachedClientBuilder builder = new XMemcachedClientBuilder(** >> AddrUtil.getAddresses(**location)); >> > >> > During the Memcache clinet operation , Key can be stored in any one of >> the Sever Mentioned above . >> > >> > When i observed the logs , the Setup is showing two Memcache Servers >> recognized , i verified with the below code . >> > >> > >> > >> > Collection<InetSocketAddress> addressList = >> > MemcachedClient.**getAvaliableServers(); >> >> > for (InetSocketAddress address : addressList) { >> > logger.error("THE address is"+address) >> > } >> > >> > >> > THE address is 10.1.1.1 >> > THE address is 10.1.1.2 >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > My question is , once i knew the Server IP and port , is Is it possible >> get the Key based on the Server ?? >> > >> > Means something like this i need >> > >> > MemcachedClinet.getKey("MyKEY"**) // from server 1 >> > MemcachedClinet.getKey("MyKEY"**) // from server 2 >> > >> > >> > Please let me know if this is possible ?? >> > >> > >> > >> > > >
