I think you're supposed to read to the point where it says queues stuff
in memory before sending to the server and extrapolate that writing to
the queue too fast is a bad thing.
On Sun, 17 Oct 2010, Shi Yu wrote:
Kelvin.
This is year 2010 and computer programs should not be that fragile.
And
On Oct 16, 9:28 pm, Shi Yu shee...@gmail.com wrote:
MapString,String map1 = new HashMapString,String();
MapString,String map2 = new HashMapString,String();
MapString,String map3 = new HashMapString,String();
You're loading at least four million strings into two
Hi Dustin. I have to go on my work now so I probably wont spend any
time on this issue. Please, before you suggest, try some experiment to
load more than 6 million records using the same API. I would be happy
to hear how you do that. I now fully rely on Whalin's API, it can
handle 14 million
On Oct 16, 11:11 pm, Kelvin Edmison kel...@kindsight.net wrote:
while trying to re-create this problem and point out the various errors in
his code, I found that, in his test case, if I did not call Future.get() to
verify the result of the set, the spyMemcached client leaked memory. Given
On Oct 16, 11:24 pm, Shi Yu shee...@gmail.com wrote:
Kelvin.
This is year 2010 and computer programs should not be that fragile.
And I believe my code is just a fast simple toy problem trying to find
out why I failed too many times in my real problem. Before I post my
problem, I checked and
On Oct 16, 11:51 pm, Shi Yu shee...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Dustin. I have to go on my work now so I probably wont spend any
time on this issue. Please, before you suggest, try some experiment to
load more than 6 million records using the same API. I would be happy
to hear how you do that. I now
Thanks Dustin, marked and will try again.
On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 2:38 AM, Dustin dsalli...@gmail.com wrote:
On Oct 16, 11:51 pm, Shi Yu shee...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Dustin. I have to go on my work now so I probably wont spend any
time on this issue. Please, before you suggest, try some
Hi,
I have two problems when using memcached java clients the spymemcached
(http://code.google.com/p/spymemcached/) and the gwhalin java client
for memcached (http://github.com/gwhalin/Memcached-Java-Client). I
found that the spymemcached failed to store more than 4.3 million
records sometimes
Follow up my previous question. I tried to read those 6 million
key,value records out. Both API are capable, but the spymemcache API
is faster (16 minutes) than the Whalin's v2.5.1 distribution (24
minutes) (http://github.com/gwhalin/Memcached-Java-Client/downloads)
.Since the spymemcache cannot
On Oct 16, 5:27 pm, Shi Yu shee...@gmail.com wrote:
I am really curious why spy cannot store up to 6 million...
I'm quite sure you can add more than 6M items to something. Part of
the problem might be that you're adding to an in-memory queue as fast
as possible, not checking results, or
I have also tried the CacheLoader API, it pops a java GC error. The
thing I haven't tried is to separate 6 million records into several
objects and try CacheLoader. But I don't think it should be that
fragile and complicated. I have spent a whole day on this issue, now I
just rely the hybrid
On Oct 16, 6:45 pm, Shi Yu shee...@gmail.com wrote:
I have also tried the CacheLoader API, it pops a java GC error. The
thing I haven't tried is to separate 6 million records into several
objects and try CacheLoader. But I don't think it should be that
fragile and complicated. I have spent a
12 matches
Mail list logo
