It has been found that with spymemcached up through 2.5, the chances of not
selecting another active server were 1 in 2^(number of servers). That means
that for a two node cluster where one node had failed, you had a one in four
chance of not finding an active node, and receiving timeouts as a result even
though the operation should redistribute to another node.
Thanks to Taso from Concur with help in identifying this issue.
Original issue reported on code.google.com by ingen...@gmail.com on 23 Apr 2011 at 12:36
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
ingen...@gmail.com
on 23 Apr 2011 at 12:36