memcached Digest, Vol 37, Issue 11

[Roy Jay]

Brad:

I have tried 3 times unsuccessfully to unsubscribe from this list.  BTW, 
I publish ezines and I do not believe your unsubscribed features are 
CAN-SPAM compliant.  Please unsubscribe me.  I am subscribed under one 
of the following email addresses, rj at arcamax.com, 
rj-memchache at arcamax.com or rj-danga at arcamax.com.

Thank you,

Roy

memcached-request at lists.danga.com wrote:
> Send memcached mailing list submissions to
> 	memcached at lists.danga.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://lists.danga.com/mailman/listinfo/memcached
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	memcached-request at lists.danga.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	memcached-owner at lists.danga.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of memcached digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Multiple eviction policies (Wojtek Meler)
>    2. about 2G memory problem and connection memory usage (Steve Chu)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2007 11:21:27 +0200
> From: "Wojtek Meler" <wmeler at wp.pl>
> Subject: Multiple eviction policies
> To: memcached <memcached at lists.danga.com>
> Message-ID: <46b83997a6217 at wp.pl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2
>
> Did you considered multiple eviction policies for memcached ?
> In common there are many types of data stored in cache and it would be 
> great if one could tune cache size and eviction policy for each type. I 
> know that it is possible to setup multiple memcached processes, but it 
> will be quite ineffective for thousands of caches.
> As far as I understand the code, current implementation has single hash 
> and linked list for LRU. It would be great if additional layer of hash 
> and linked list could be introduced that group data in caches, allowing 
> to set different eviction rules for each cache. I don't fully understand 
> "managed mode" but probably cache could be identified by part of data 
> key. Any comments ?
>
> Regards,
> Wojtek
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 18:45:27 +0800
> From: "Steve Chu" <stvchu at gmail.com>
> Subject: about 2G memory problem and connection memory usage
> To: memcached at lists.danga.com
> Message-ID:
> 	<4ac0d28c0708070345q362a1ff3j3c2a7ea13c212a74 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> There is a limit that we only can do "-m 2048" in a 32bit box.
>
> Here's my situation:
> I dig into memcached's source code, and find that memcached is using
> malloc to get memory for connection structure, and slabs for
> items(objects). when we reach the 2G limit, so there's no more memory
> for connection structures available, and we can't connect mcd any
> more.
>
> Is there a need that we set "-m 1800", so we leave 248MB for
> connections. so, when the memcached reaches limit(here 1800) and
> starts to free items, we still can connect to it?
>
> Is -m option for slabs not for malloc?
>
>