Tickets :: Comment on [#10123] Use memcache flags to keep track of large objects

* Your Email Address
* Spam protection	Enter the letters below: .__ .__ __..__ ._. [__)[__)(__ [ __ \| [__)\| .__)[_./_\|_
Comment	> I've been working with Gonçalo on this so I'll answer you. >>>> Your patch did not apply cleanly, so I had to go through by hand and >>>> make the necessary changes. Could you test and make sure I >>>> transferred the changes correctly? >>> >>> Yep, its ok. >>> I think that it should be sent to dev (or the appropriate place), a >>> message to warn people that starting to use this code will bring >>> unexpected results if they have large objects on memcache. >> >> How? If I read the code correctly, this new code will simply cause a >> cache miss. >> > With the last patch you made you're right. The problem here is that > every key will cause a cache miss. This returns the platform into a > cold cache state which isn't an expected behavior from a minor > upgrade. We now have upwards 10G of cache data so I think you can > understand how regenerating this data can make a performance hit. > >>> We have made (untested yet) for ourselves a temporary patch to >>> convert old large objects to the new flag system. Attached the temp >>> patch >> >> No need to convert these values. Memcache, as the name itself >> implies, is a cache. If data objects suddenly go missing, this is an >> expected occurrence. > > You're very right, but we use memcache to also store sessions and > that implies logging everyone out. I agree that memcache isn't the > right solution to store sessions but for our case it seems the best > and it's an horde conf. > > As Gonçalo said the warning would make sysadmins aware of these > implications and the patch only makes the transition smoother.
Attachment
Watch this ticket

Saved Queries