Looks like the protocol is getting out of sync somehow. conn_waiting only means it's waiting to read more bytes from the socket from a set. Then it looks like the client doesn't send anymore bytes, times out, then closes the socket (-> conn_read -> conn_closing).
It's most likely a bug in how you're using the binary protocol, but it's hard to say from here. Somehow you're writing fewer bytes to the socket than you told the binary protocol to receive. On Wed, 26 Apr 2017, watul123 wrote: > Yes I am 100% sure. > When the binary protocol is in picture then only this happens, otherwise same > test program with same argument runs perfect. I debugged a lot before > posting to this group. I am with you on the fact the binary protocol has > nothing to do with the timeouts, but it is the one cause the failure while > reading from socket, then I guess the connection gets close, and at the > application level I get MEMCACHED_TIMEOUT. > > This is what I see on memcached's log > > 36: going from conn_parse_cmd to conn_mwrite > 36: going from conn_mwrite to conn_new_cmd > 36: going from conn_new_cmd to conn_waiting > 36: going from conn_waiting to conn_read > 36: going from conn_read to conn_closing > <36 connection closed. > 36: going from conn_closing to conn_closed > > > > On Wednesday, April 26, 2017 at 5:02:04 PM UTC-7, Dormando wrote: > Any way to get more information about the timeouts you're seeing? > > There's nothing in the protocol that would cause "timeouts", but bugs > somewhere could cause clients to hang waiting on more data I guess. > > You're sure they're timeouts and not some other kind of error? > > On Wed, 26 Apr 2017, Atul Waghmare wrote: > > > Hi there, > > > > I am facing one issue with memcached binary protocol. Whenever I > force the memcached to use the binary protocol, my application get > occasional timeouts > > and occasional success. The percentage of failure(set timeouts) is > more than 80% when the memcached spawn with binary protocol . The moment > I remove the > > binary option, the success rate is 100%. > > > > memcached - v1.4.36 > > libmemcached -v1.0.18 > > > > Any idea what may be wrong? > > > > Thanks, > > Atul > > > > -- > > > > --- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "memcached" group. > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, > send an email to memcached+...@googlegroups.com. > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > > > > > -- > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "memcached" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to memcached+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "memcached" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to memcached+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
