> has already done some profiling and they can help us to understand
> the functionalities that can
> > improve performance. Any suggestions are welcome.
> >
> > Thanks & Regards
> > Ravi G
> >
> > From: Scott Mansfield [mailt
M
> To: memcached <memcached@googlegroups.com>
> Cc: Ravikiran Gummaluri <rgum...@xilinx.com>; Venkata Ravi Shankar
> Jonnalagadda
> <vjon...@xilinx.com>; Sunita Jain <suni...@xilinx.com>
> Subject: Re: Ordering of commands per connection
>
Cc: Ravikiran Gummaluri <rgum...@xilinx.com>; Venkata Ravi Shankar
> Jonnalagadda <vjon...@xilinx.com>; Sunita Jain <suni...@xilinx.com>
> Subject: Re: Ordering of commands per connection
>
> I'm actually also very interested to see anything you can share about your
> project.
I'm actually also very interested to see anything you can share about your
project.
On Monday, January 23, 2017 at 12:50:03 PM UTC-8, Dormando wrote:
>
> Hey,
>
> I've always wanted to try implementing a server with a xilinx chip. Seems
> like you folks would be more qualified to do that :)
>
Hey,
I've always wanted to try implementing a server with a xilinx chip. Seems
like you folks would be more qualified to do that :)
The short answer is that the server does guarantee order right now. The
ASCII protocol doesn't work very well if you reorder the results, but
primarily all clients
HI ,
We are planning to use the MemchaheD software and accelerate it with
hardware offload. We would like to know from protocol prospective each
connection should maintain the order in which it receives the command to
send a response back ?
for Ex: If we receive GET1 GET2 SET1 GET3 do we need
