I filed http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=68
Can you please update it with the version you're running? Meanwhile, there needs to at least be a test for it. I'll see if I can do that today. On Jul 20, 7:53 am, chx <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > I have a really weird bug to report, first of all, this fixed it: > - memcached_return ret = memcached_add(memcached_, key.c_str(), > key.length(), "1", 1, 7200, 0); > + memcached_return ret = memcached_add(memcached_, key.c_str(), > key.length(), "00001", 5, 7200, 0); > > These are then increased and decreased by 36 processes... And we found > that memcached can corrupt data when it handles a lot of data writes > and the data length (in characters) changes while another increase is > coming in. > > get 0-2009072009-2-3705-SGFycnkgUG90dGVy > VALUE 0-2009072009-2-3705-SGFycnkgUG90dGVy 0 ??~59 END > > that ?? is hex 90, A3 ... so basically garbage (yeah we have funny key > names). It should be just an integer. And not a big one at that, the > way the application is, it's never more than a two digits integer... > Since we changed the data width to 5 (overkill) things hold up. Weird, > as I said. > > Regards > > Karoly "chx" Negyesi
