Well, I'm sorry but what I used memcached client is gwhalin's client. I searched the client that you said, wow, It's designed for high perfomance applications. Maybe I should pay more attention to this, Thx.
by the other side, I can tell you that you can do like this by gwhalin's client: MemCachedClient mcc = new MemCachedClient(); SockIOPool pool = SockIOPool.getInstance(); pool.setSocketTO(3000); pool.initialize(); then you use mcc to "put" or "get" objects. it will work by the param of pool. when you "put" or "get" object, memcached client will try to connect to server. if the time beyonds 3000 milliseconds, the command will be considered failure, then return false or null. may my answer can help you. 2011/11/23 ktechie <[email protected]> > 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 > -- 柴俊堃 敬上
