mike252004 / spymemcached

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/spymemcached
0 stars 0 forks source link

Java Heap Size, Queue #109

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 8 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
Despite spymemcached seems very optimized, asynchronous etc, sometime it's 
better to make things simple and easy.

We have a lot of problems with spymemcached architecture. At the start of 
application we uploading many values into the memcached, so it leads to 
queue overflow, and even worse, it leads to OutOfMemory exceptions when 
queue a long while holds references to objects. 

A problem is that there is no synchrounous set/add/incr methods. All of 
them queued. And queue can write data in minutes. This also leads to 
another problem. If you have second service, that updates memcached with 
some new value. New values can be overwritten with older values by first 
service (because that value was minute ago pushed into the queue).

To solve our problems we switched to http://www.whalin.com/memcached/
Anyway spymemcached is a good product, and I hope that these problems can 
be solved. Thank you.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by maq...@gmail.com on 9 Dec 2009 at 2:24

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
I don't think there's a bug I can fix here.  As best as I can tell, you're 
either
using it incorrectly or perhaps the documentation is not clear enough.

I'm pretty sure there's a way to synchronously use every mechanism provided by
spymemcached.  Certainly set, and, and incr may all be used synchronously.  They
return Futures.  Block them if you'd like.

For your case, it's probably better to use the CacheLoader class, though.  You 
can
see the optimizations I've put into it here:

http://dustin.github.com/2009/09/23/spymemcached-optimizations.html

I'm going to have to close this as invalid because I believe I've already done
everything possible to deal with the issues you've run into.  I believe minor 
changes
to your app will allow it to solve them quite easily and efficiently.

Original comment by dsalli...@gmail.com on 9 Dec 2009 at 6:38

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
Oh.. That's my mistake. I'll test it again.

Original comment by maq...@gmail.com on 9 Dec 2009 at 8:27