Hi Brian,

Can you please let me know as to when v0.28 will be out?

Regards,
Nikhils

On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 11:26 AM, Nikhils <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> No specific reason other than that we have done bulk of the testing of our
>>> code with 0.26 version...
>>>
>>
>> I would apply this patch to your version. Trond noticed that you were
>> overflowing the master key value:
>> http://paste2.org/p/183969
>>
>
> Yeah thanks. I realized that on a relook. Apologies.
>
> Regards,
> Nikhils
>
>> Regards,
>>> Nikhils
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>       -Brian
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Nikhils
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 7:49 PM, Brian Aker <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> I've applied this patch. It should be pushed within the hour.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>      -Brian
>>>
>>>
>>> On Apr 14, 2009, at 3:50 AM, Nikhils wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Brian,
>>>
>>> A careful perusal of the memcached_mget_by_key() function revealed the
>>> bug.
>>>
>>> The code was generating the serverid by using the master key first.
>>> However if the serverid was 0, the following check was causing re-evaluation
>>> of the serverid by using the buffer key leading to the query being sent to
>>> another server:
>>>
>>>  if (master_server_key) /* if the serverid had evaluated to zero, we go
>>> to else */
>>>    server_key= master_server_key;
>>>  else
>>>    server_key= memcached_generate_hash(ptr, keys[x], key_length[x]);
>>>
>>> After fixing this, the *_by_key logic appears to be working just fine.
>>>
>>> Please find attached, a patch (diff -c format) which fixes this.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Nikhils
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 12:27 PM, Nikhils <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I recently shifted to using the memcached_get/set_by_key APIs. The
>>> trouble is that even after warming the cache with all of the content, a
>>> subsequent query to fetch the key/value pair fails with a not found error. I
>>> am seeing this behaviour in a 2-node memcached cluster.
>>>
>>> Its occurring consistently and on reverting back to using the normal
>>> memcached_get/set APIs, the key/value pairs can be retrieved appropriately!
>>> However I do need to use these by_key APIs for my data consistency logic.
>>>
>>> I have added appropriate logging information in my C code (am linking to
>>> libmemcached 0.27) and confirmed that the master key is the same in both
>>> set_by_key/get_by_key calls.
>>>
>>> Anything obvious that I am missing? Has anyone observed such dubious
>>> behaviour before with these by_key calls? Comments appreciated.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Nikhils
>>>
>>> <libmemcached_mget_by_key_bug.patch>
>>>
>>> --
>>> _______________________________________________________
>>> Brian "Krow" Aker, brian at tangent.org
>>> Seattle, Washington
>>> http://krow.net/                     <-- Me
>>> http://tangent.org/                <-- Software
>>> _______________________________________________________
>>> You can't grep a dead tree.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> _______________________________________________________
>>> Brian "Krow" Aker, brian at tangent.org
>>> Seattle, Washington
>>> http://krow.net/                     <-- Me
>>> http://tangent.org/                <-- Software
>>> _______________________________________________________
>>> You can't grep a dead tree.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> _______________________________________________________
>> Brian "Krow" Aker, brian at tangent.org
>> Seattle, Washington
>> http://krow.net/                     <-- Me
>> http://tangent.org/                <-- Software
>> _______________________________________________________
>> You can't grep a dead tree.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to