Thanks for the reply! Are there any performance implication of using a normal get v/s a get that also returns the unique cas number ?
Looking forward to CAS implementation in the client. Until then I will stick to the current locking method for which I would love to hear if there are any improvements that I could make. -Rakesh On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 3:31 AM, Dustin Sallings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Feb 21, 2008, at 12:51, Rakesh Rajan wrote: > > > I am currently using Dustin's Java library (memcached-2.0-pre7). I > > havn't seen any CAS function in that. So safely assuming that I need > > to continue to use java for my project ( :) ) , what are the > > alternatives that I have ? > > > > So from my understanding of CAS, I can pass a unique code, that I > > get from "get" operation, to the "set" operation. And in case it > > fails, I would need to fetch the latest value and update the cache > > entry again ( this would need to some kind of loop to make sure that > > I don't miss pushing any updates to cache). > > > Sorry, I've been a bit behind in my emails. > > No, I never quite worked CAS support into my java client. I've got > a > long plane ride ahead of me tomorrow, so maybe that'll give me > something to do. :) > > Basically, you do the get+set in a loop where the set fails if > something else mutated the value between the get and set. > > -- > Dustin Sallings > >
