We have implemented a java solution which uses memcached, the client being xmemcached.
We are using a multiget feature, which has helped in improving performance. Is there any recommendations around how many objects should I try to fetch using multiget at a time. The default timeout is one sec, which could be changed by passing a parameter On Nov 23, 7:37 am, 柴俊堃 <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi: > I'm a java programer. accroding to ur question, I made a test to verify > my solution that u can use Collection Object. what I use memcached client > is > java_memcached-release_2.6.2.jar which is > fromhttps://github.com/gwhalin/Memcached-Java-Client/downloads > > My test as following: > class Person implements Serializable{ > /** > * > */ > private static final long serialVersionUID = 4468130987525379646L; > private String name; > private int age; > public String getName() { > return name; > } > public void setName(String name) { > this.name = name; > } > public int getAge() { > return age; > } > public void setAge(int age) { > this.age = age; > } > public Person(String name, int age) { > super(); > this.name = name; > this.age = age; > }} > > *Important: u must implements Serializable interface. cuz the framework > send object to memcached server by socket finally.* > then, to use: > > Person p1=new Person("Jack", 20); > Person p2=new Person("Rose", 30); > LinkedList<Person> ll= new LinkedList<Person>(); > ll.add(p1); > ll.add(p2); > if (memcacheService.add("KeyList", ll)){ > System.out.println("success to add linked list"); > }else{ > System.out.println("fail to add linked list"); > } > @SuppressWarnings("unchecked") > LinkedList<Person> tt= (LinkedList<Person>)memcacheService.get("KeyList"); > System.out.println("object count in linked list:"+tt.size()); > Person p3=tt.get(0); > Person p4=tt.get(1); > System.out.println(p3.getName()+p3.getAge()); > System.out.println(p4.getName()+p4.getAge()); > > may my code helps u! > > 2011/11/23 Dustin <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, November 22, 2011 12:07:15 PM UTC-8, Dormando wrote: > > >> > Dormando,Quick question. > > >> > So if I were to� > > >> > put (key, array_of_size_3) > >> > and then > >> > append (key, new_item) > > >> > value = get (key) > >> > size of value will be 4 ? > > >> if array_of_size_3 is "3 bytes", and new_item is "1 byte", then yes. > >> remember that if you're appending complex structures, you still need to be > >> able to parse what you get back. > > > This entirely depends on the format of your data. If whatever you are > > storing can be concatenated and make a larger version of it, then yeah. If > > it's something like a JSON array, then no. > > -- > 柴俊堃 敬上
