On Oct 5, 12:02 am, Dustin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Depends on what you mean. get is atomic and set is atomic, but you > can't do an atomic get+set (though CAS will allow you to emulate it).
I mean just what i said :-) get and set separately, not together > No two sets for the same key will ever corrupt each other (though if > two happen at the "same time", you won't know for sure which one > won). A get will never return anything other than exactly what was > set (i.e. a set will not modify the data a get is transmitting). This is definition of atomic :-) > If memcached didn't have these properties, it wouldn't be useful in > most of the applications where it's necessary. :) I understand that and i know it by experience, but had stumbled upon presentation in which it is said that get and set aren't atomic. So i asked google to be sure and almost every link said that they aren't atomic (try it for yourself). Seems that there are some global misinformation about atomic properties out there in internet :-) "Someone in internet is wrong!" (xkcd.com) Maybe answer to this simple question coupled with definition of "atomic" should be added to memcached FAQ?
