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
or?
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)
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 fail
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 oth
nts 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,
> > >
> >
t; >
> > 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 t
>
> > >
> > >
> > > 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 t
TC-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 cou
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
&
gt; > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 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?
> >
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.
>> &
m 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
> >
ng 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.
>
> > > > 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
> > > > >
; > When the binary protocol is in
> picture then only this happens, otherwise same test program with same
> argument runs
> > perfect.
> > > I
> > > > debugged a
> > > > >
> > 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
Hi!
Letting everyone know that I did a presentation on the binary protocol few
nights ago and that I've shared the slides on:
http://www.slideshare.net/tmaesaka/memcached-binary-protocol-in-a-nutshell-presentation/
In brief the presentation covers the following:
- Why Binary?
- How w
Awesome! thanks for doing this :)
On Sat, 20 Sep 2008, Toru Maesaka wrote:
> Hi!
> Letting everyone know that I did a presentation on the binary protocol few
> nights ago and that I've shared the slides on:
>
> http://www.slideshare.net/tmaesaka/memcached-binary-pr
Status: New
Owner:
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium
New issue 275 by mojid...@gmail.com: binary protocol TOUCH,GAT,GATQ bug
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=275
cache.set("x", "xxx", 3);
cache.touch("x", 1)
TimeUnit.SECONDS.sleep(1);
System.out.println(cache.get("x"));
Status: New
Owner:
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium
New issue 176 by evanjelias: Binary protocol: delete_hits and delete_misses
not incremented?
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=176
Hi folks,
When using the binary protocol, it seems that the delete_hits and
delet
Comment #1 on issue 275 by ingen...@gmail.com: binary protocol
TOUCH,GAT,GATQ bug
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=275
What server is in use? There is no checking of server responses.
Updates:
Status: needinfo
Comment #2 on issue 275 by ingen...@gmail.com: binary protocol
TOUCH,GAT,GATQ bug
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=275
(No comment was entered for this change.)
Comment #3 on issue 275 by mojid...@gmail.com: binary protocol
TOUCH,GAT,GATQ bug
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=275
Ubuntu 10.04.4 LTS,memcached 1.4.13
Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 5.5 (Tikanga),memcached 1.4.11
==
The server response statu
Comment #4 on issue 275 by dorma...@rydia.net: binary protocol
TOUCH,GAT,GATQ bug
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=275
If you sleep for 2 seconds instead of one, it should work. Memcached's
internal clock updates once per second, so if you want to see things change
at a
Comment #5 on issue 275 by mojid...@gmail.com: binary protocol
TOUCH,GAT,GATQ bug
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=275
cache.set("x", "xxx", 3);
cache.touch("x", 1)
while(true){
TimeUnit.SECONDS.sleep(1);
System.out.println(cache.get("x"));
}
===output==
x
Comment #6 on issue 275 by bongjae@gmail.com: binary protocol
TOUCH,GAT,GATQ bug
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=275
This is similar to the issue which I reported before.
http://groups.google.com/group/memcached/browse_thread/thread/1a40b776e35bbf08/17b7c53cd914e7f7?l
Comment #7 on issue 275 by uzza...@gmail.com: binary protocol
TOUCH,GAT,GATQ bug
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=275
Here is a patch that solves the problem. process_bin_touch() was reading
only header without extra fields, so exptime was always 0.
Attachments:
Comment #8 on issue 275 by uzza...@gmail.com: binary protocol
TOUCH,GAT,GATQ bug
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=275
P.S. Send pull request at github with the same code.
Updates:
Status: Fixed
Comment #9 on issue 275 by dorma...@rydia.net: binary protocol
TOUCH,GAT,GATQ bug
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=275
this got merged a year ago... forgot to close the issue. doing so now.
--
You received this message because this project is
Comment #10 on issue 275 by semnan...@gmail.com: binary protocol
TOUCH,GAT,GATQ bug
https://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=275
not fixed i use install make test and give me this page link. i send using
php test poster to qa. please check it. debian wheezy dot deb memcached
5
Comment #11 on issue 275 by dorma...@rydia.net: binary protocol
TOUCH,GAT,GATQ bug
https://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=275
that's not a version of memcached.
--
You received this message because this project is configured to send all
issue notifications to this address.
Y
Status: New
Owner:
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium
New issue 106 by mar...@hyves.nl: binary protocol parsing can cause
memcached server lockup
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=106
What steps will reproduce the problem?
1. run a memcached server on localhost port 1
Updates:
Status: Fixed
Comment #1 on issue 176 by dsallings: Binary protocol: delete_hits and
delete_misses not incremented?
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=176
This was fixed in 83af8a219b42e0c46a8a7cfd5def27444c6fe78b (not yet in a
release)
Comment #5 on issue 48 by a...@enyim.com: binary protocol incr on text
returns success 0
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=48
i'm not sure which version includes this fix, but both 1.4.3 and 1.4.4 give
me a status code 0 (SUCCESS) when
trying to increment non numeric valu
Comment #6 on issue 48 by dsallings: binary protocol incr on text returns
success 0
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=48
I see status code 6 and the error text there. 6 == bad value for
incr/decr. I believe this
is correct. This change went in as 1.4.0-rc1-2-gcce46e8
Comment #7 on issue 48 by a...@enyim.com: binary protocol incr on text
returns success 0
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=48
yeah, sorry i forgot that the status is supposed to be 16bit not 8.
--
You received this message because you are listed in the owner
or CC fields of
Comment #1 on issue 106 by pi3orama: binary protocol parsing can cause
memcached server lockup
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=106
The root cause of this issue is try_read_udp() never reset c->rbytes.
The processing of conn_nread minus c->rbytes by c->rlbytes, so if extra
Comment #2 on issue 106 by pi3orama: binary protocol parsing can cause
memcached server lockup
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=106
The issue is studied and solved under the help of Snitchaser:
http://gitorious.org/snitchaser
Updates:
Owner: eric.d.lambert
Comment #3 on issue 106 by eric.d.lambert: binary protocol parsing can
cause memcached server lockup
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=106
this looks similar to the problem with issue 158, so i'll take a look at
this
Comment #4 on issue 106 by airat.ha...@gmail.com: binary protocol parsing
can cause memcached server lockup
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=106
may be this specific issue is solved by the provided patch (haven't tried),
but in general the problem remains.
Even after applyi
Comment #5 on issue 106 by pi3or...@gmail.com: binary protocol parsing can
cause memcached server lockup
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=106
Hello again! I (the author of http://gitorious.org/snitchaser) has
disappeared for nearly 10 month, and now come back to continue
Comment #6 on issue 106 by dorma...@rydia.net: binary protocol parsing can
cause memcached server lockup
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=106
Can you issue a patch against 1.6.0-beta1? Or were you talking about 1.4.5,
not 1.3.5?
Comment #7 on issue 106 by pi3or...@gmail.com: binary protocol parsing can
cause memcached server lockup
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=106
Ok. 1.6.0-beta1 still suffer from this problem, the principle is similar.
Following patch solve it (I thought).
--- ./daemon/me
Updates:
Status: Started
Owner: trond.no...@gmail.com
Comment #8 on issue 106 by dorma...@rydia.net: binary protocol parsing can
cause memcached server lockup
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=106
I just pulled a patch similar to this into my 1.4.7 tree.
Thi
Comment #9 on issue 106 by pi3or...@gmail.com: binary protocol parsing can
cause memcached server lockup
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=106
The recvfom() use 0 as SIZE and NULL as BUFFER. According to manual, that
call will consume the incoming packet. Without it, epoll
Comment #10 on issue 106 by dorma...@rydia.net: binary protocol parsing can
cause memcached server lockup
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=106
The incoming packet is consumed in try_read_udp(), so if you get into a
conn_close state after reading one packet, calling an emp
Comment #11 on issue 106 by pi3or...@gmail.com: binary protocol parsing can
cause memcached server lockup
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=106
I think you are right.
In my first patch (Comment 1), the recvfrom() call is critical because in
that situation, if a UDP socket
Updates:
Status: Fixed
Comment #12 on issue 106 by dorma...@rydia.net: binary protocol parsing can
cause memcached server lockup
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=106
think this was merged up. closing.
Status: New
Owner:
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium
New issue 107 by mar...@hyves.nl: binary protocol can only parse 1 command
within a recieved udp / tcp buffer
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=107
What steps will reproduce the problem?
1. compile attached code
2.
Updates:
Owner: eric.d.lambert
Comment #1 on issue 107 by eric.d.lambert: binary protocol can only parse 1
command within a recieved udp / tcp buffer
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=107
(No comment was entered for this change.)
Updates:
Status: Fixed
Comment #2 on issue 107 by dorma...@rydia.net: binary protocol can only
parse 1 command within a recieved udp / tcp buffer
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=107
wow this is ancient.
fix for this is currently sitting in my for_148 branch and wi
51 matches
Mail list logo
