Ack. I'll take another look at that.
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 12:48 PM, Dustin dsalli...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, April 23, 2012 4:20:15 PM UTC-7, Aaron Stone wrote:
It also didn't do anything; no commits resulted from running that
command.
If the engine merge branch actually has all
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:01 PM, Aaron Stone sodab...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:45 PM, Dustin dsalli...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sunday, April 8, 2012 10:53:53 PM UTC-7, Aaron Stone wrote:
git cherry reported 443 changesets between master and merge-wip. The first
few changesets
On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 10:47 PM, Dustin dsalli...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, April 4, 2012 11:48:26 AM UTC-7, Aaron Stone wrote:
Hello list! Long time. The storage engine branch looks a little bit
behind master - is
github.com/memcached/**memcached:engine-puhttp://github.com/memcached
On Sun, Apr 8, 2012 at 3:01 PM, Aaron Stone sodab...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 10:47 PM, Dustin dsalli...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, April 4, 2012 11:48:26 AM UTC-7, Aaron Stone wrote:
Hello list! Long time. The storage engine branch looks a little bit
behind master
Hello list! Long time. The storage engine branch looks a little bit behind
master - is github.com/memcached/memcached:engine-pu the most up to date
branch (last commit in late 2011)?
I'm thinking about writing a proxying storage backend--rather than using
one of the many memcached proxies, as
This article came my way by email today, and I think it well worth sharing here:
http://jcole.us/blog/archives/2010/09/28/mysql-swap-insanity-and-the-numa-architecture/
Cheers,
Aaron
objects.
Regards,
J.S.Mammen
On Jul 29, 1:49 am, Aaron Stone sodab...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 8:37 AM, jsm mamm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jul 28, 8:02 pm, Rajesh Nair rajesh.nair...@gmail.com wrote:
Gavin,
If you go by the strict sense of word, HTTP protocol is not a
pre
api over http.
Although, you could argue that both the ascii protocol and binary
protocol
are restful, the sure seem to me to fit the definition pretty closely.
/Henrik
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 12:56, Aaron Stone sodab...@gmail.com wrote:
What's a ReST protocol? ReST is a model
On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 8:37 AM, jsm mamm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jul 28, 8:02 pm, Rajesh Nair rajesh.nair...@gmail.com wrote:
Gavin,
If you go by the strict sense of word, HTTP protocol is not a pre-requisite
for REST service.
It requires a protocol which supports linking entities through
Please include memcached and libevent versions and your client
libraries (just for completeness).
What do you mean by went down? Did it become unresponsive? Did the
process die? Memory use spin out of control? Anything else catch on
fire?
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 10:16 AM, Beier
the service was dead twice, that's why you see two of the same
messages:
these are the options when memcached is started
-d
-m 2048
-c 3000
Thanks!
On Feb 22, 10:28 am, Aaron Stone sodab...@gmail.com wrote:
Please include memcached and libevent versions and your client
libraries (just
man memcached:
memcached -s socketfile
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 3:52 PM, Brian Hawkins brianh...@gmail.com wrote:
I've searched the internet and cannot find a conclusive answer to whether or
not memcached supports domain sockets. Can anyone point me in the right
direction?
Thanks
Brian
2010/1/6 KaiGai Kohei kai...@ak.jp.nec.com:
(2010/01/07 11:39), Aaron Stone wrote:
If users means users of your site, then are you going to apply
per-user access controls to the rows in your database, too?
Yes, see the page.14 of the slides:
http://sepgsql.googlecode.com/files/JLS2009
On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 2:48 AM, pub crawler pubcrawler@gmail.com wrote:
Obviously dissecting a memcached instance up into separate user
kingdoms would have implied effect of slowing memcached down and
adding unnecessary complexity. Unsure how much either would truly
impact it however.
Maybe more esoteric options should come through a single flag, ala
ssh, where you can have -o UnusualOption=foo. That reduces the
number of single-letter flags in the command-line flag namespace.
On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 2:33 AM, Trond Norbyetrond.nor...@sun.com wrote:
On 25. juli. 2009, at
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Dustindsalli...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jul 28, 11:04 am, Aaron Stone sodab...@gmail.com wrote:
Maybe more esoteric options should come through a single flag, ala
ssh, where you can have -o UnusualOption=foo. That reduces the
number of single-letter flags
What's that? Extra machines laying around? I can offer Tru64 5.1 on
Alpha and Ultrix 4.5 on MIPS...
;)
On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 8:17 AM, Michael Shadlemike...@gmail.com wrote:
If you are missing a specific machine type that you want let me know. I have
a bunch of machines sitting around that
On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 12:19 PM, Dustindsalli...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jul 14, 10:12 am, Aaron Stone sodab...@gmail.com wrote:
What's that? Extra machines laying around? I can offer Tru64 5.1 on
Alpha and Ultrix 4.5 on MIPS...
Heh. Do they do C99? :)
I have a license for ANSI C ;)
I
Hi Nick,
There are two big issues that the binary protocol seeks to solve,
IMHO: consistently implementing features that were shoehorned into the
text protocol (e.g. compare-and-swap), and giving a mechanism for
future extensions to the protocol.
I don't recall there being any significant
By range query, do you mean querying for a range of keys, or for a
byte-range of the value?
On Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 12:15 AM, Steve Chu stv...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi, all,
I am glad to announce that MemcacheDB 1.2.1 beta is release!
This version supports the new 'rget' command. 'rget'
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 3:40 AM, Anatoly Vorobey avoro...@gmail.com wrote:
Tony,
As you mentioned, we don't see any benefit to runtime selection of the
storage engine; thus the indirect call is unnecessary in our environment.
I'm curious about this choice. Have you tried to benchmark the
Branch friction aside, Paul Saab's description of the interesting
problems is really something worth expanding upon and learning from in
context of a real-world implementation going after C10K scalability.
For example, Paul notes that with thousands of open TCP connections,
memcached can start
On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 10:10 PM, Dustin dsalli...@gmail.com wrote:
On Dec 5, 8:21 pm, ionous shalmane...@gmail.com wrote:
i poked around on the faq and mail lists, but haven't seen anything
definitive;
does anyone know whether there is a guaranteed order to the items
returned in
... depends on who'd do it :) Thegearman
protocol's pretty terse compared to the memcached one...
So, out of my hands at least.
On Sat, 8 Nov 2008, Aaron Stone wrote:
Is it too late to pick a middle course: using memcached binary
protocol with commands for queues, but implemented as an independent
implementation the client/server.
Initially I was weakly expecting to add gearman's commands to the binary
protocol and having it exist as a storage engine for memcached, but I
concede to brian's intent to keep it a separate project :)
-Dormando
On Fri, 7 Nov 2008, Aaron Stone wrote:
I didn't
pm, Aaron Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Have a mailing list link? It'd be good to continue with where you left
off / review what you were thinking at the time.
I wrote about it on my embarrassingly tongue-in-cheek titled blog:
http://www.rockstarprogrammer.org/post/2008/oct/04/what
Hi Folks,
I've been lately about message queues, and noticing there are a
projects out there that speak memcache protocol for queues. Most of
them work by polling, though, and that sucks, and most seems to
overload the meaning of GET, all in different ways.
I'm imagining a generic set of
On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 12:22 PM, Dustin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Nov 6, 11:51 am, Aaron Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've been lately about message queues, and noticing there are a
projects out there that speak memcache protocol for queues. Most of
them work by polling, though
28 matches
Mail list logo
