Sorry, just re-read the question. You are just doing an async set here, so no timeout is relevant. The operation will be queued up and processed. I suppose if you fire tons of those, then it's possible to fill up the queues, so the future requests will start blocking waiting for the queue to drain.
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 3:42 PM, Boris Partensky <[email protected]>wrote: > <<Can anyone tell me if the set operation has a timeout even if I don't > <<specify one? > > I think it defaults to 1 sec (defined in DefaultConnectionFactory class) > > > On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 3:11 PM, Harry Duin <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I am using the package net.spy.memcached and noticed that the set >> method uses a Future<Boolean> but my code is not using that return >> value, i.e. I am not invoking a get on the Future to see the result of >> the set. >> >> Can anyone tell me if the set operation has a timeout even if I don't >> specify one? I am a bit concerned that there is no timeout and I can >> take up system resources. Just today I got over 3k timeouts on the get >> call, who is using the Future to verify the result. >> >> I am using the timeout feature of Future on the get methods I have. Is >> it recommended that I use that for the set/add/delete methods as well? >> >> Harry >> > >
