+9, Dormando 님의 말:
On Jul 31, 2014, at 10:01 AM, Byung-chul Hong byungch...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hello,
I'm testing the scalability of memcached-1.4.20 version in a GET
dominated system.
For a linked-list traversal in a hash table (do_item_get), it is
protected
UTC+9, Dormando 님의 말:
On Jul 31, 2014, at 10:01 AM, Byung-chul Hong byungch...@gmail.com
javascript: wrote:
Hello,
I'm testing the scalability of memcached-1.4.20 version in a GET dominated
system.
For a linked-list traversal in a hash table (do_item_get), it is protected
Hello,
I'm testing the scalability of memcached-1.4.20 version in a GET dominated
system.
For a linked-list traversal in a hash table (do_item_get), it is protected
by interleaved lock (per bucket),
so it showed very high scalability.
But, after linked-list traversal, LRU update is protected
Hello, Ryan, dormando,
Thanks a lot for the clear explanation and the comments.
I'm trying to find out how many requests I can batch as a muli-get within
the allowed latency.
I think multi-get has many advantages, the only penalty is the longer
latency as pointed out in the above answer.
But, the
Hello,
For now, I'm trying to evaluate the performance of memcached server by
using several client workloads.
I have a question about multi-get implementation in binary protocol.
As I know, in ascii protocol, we can send multiple keys in a single request
packet to implement multi-get.
But, in
