. So again I would like to
override the autodetection of ac_cv_c_alignment and force NEEDS_ALIGN.
-Mat
On Aug 4, 11:47 am, Dustin wrote:
> What does this break? It doesn't seem to affect any of the current
> builds.
>
> On Aug 4, 8:05 am, Mat Hostetter wrote:
>
>
--- configure.ac.orig 2009-08-04 10:51:37.074888000 -0400
+++ configure.ac2009-08-04 10:51:44.94434 -0400
@@ -303,22 +303,22 @@
], [
char *buf = malloc(32);
uint64_t *ptr = (uint64_t*)(buf+2);
*ptr = 0x1;
return 0;
])
],[
ac_cv_c_alig
The memcached FAQ links to this document describing the binary protocol:
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/wiki/MemcacheBinaryProtocol
Unfortunately, this document is out of date compared to the
protocol-binary.xml that ships with 1.4.0. For example, it is missing
various opcodes like Incr
On Jun 3, 1:03 am, Dustin wrote:
> On Jun 2, 5:03 pm, Mat Hostetter wrote:
>
> > In items.c in memcached-1.2.8, these arrays allow indices up to but
> > not including LARGEST_ID:
>
> Good calls. For bonus points, do you think you can contrive some
> tests that
In items.c in memcached-1.2.8, these arrays allow indices up to but
not including LARGEST_ID:
#define LARGEST_ID 255
...
static item *heads[LARGEST_ID];
static item *tails[LARGEST_ID];
So this comment (which appears twice) is confused:
/* always true, warns: assert(it->slabs_clsid <= LARGEST
