Little update after a day of debugging. Nothing seems to have changed in memcache. The prodeagle messup was due to a configuration error. My bad.
But I would still be *REALLY* interested in knowing if my assumptions hold. Cheers, -Andrin On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Andrin von Rechenberg <[email protected]>wrote: > Hi there > > I suspect something has changed in the memcache setup (about 1 week ago). > > I'm the guy that built prodeagle which relies on a few assumptions on > memcache. > ( > http://googleappengine.blogspot.com/2011/10/prodeagle-analyzing-your-app-engine.html > ) > > This is by definition bad. I know. But it was soooooo lovely and > convenient. > I have a tiny memcache implementation detail question. > > ProdEagle works on two assumptions: > 1) Objects with the same size that are accessed only once are FIFO freed. > First in, First out. > 2) The sharding function of the memcache is based on a hash. > > Is suspect 2) is not true anymore or never was. > ProdEagle is a bit messed because of this. > > I would really appreciate if someone could tell me if 1) & 2) are true or > not... > > Cheers, > -Andrin > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
