dustin at spy.net
Wed Sep 5 16:27:23 UTC 2007
On Sep 5, 2007, at 8:41 , hirose31 at t3.rim.or.jp wrote:
> replication sequence:
> 1. client requests SET command to master
> 2. master stores to own area.
> 3. master send key/vaue to slave by memcached protocol
> 4. master do not wait receiving "STORED" from slave (asynchronous)
> 5. master return "STORED" to client
> There is no get-back-old-data problem, even if master goes down during
> between step of 2 and 4. because client does not receive "STORED"
> response from master, so client will retry after a while.
If you could add a sync delete before sending the value to the
slave, then you'd never have consistency problems.
More information about the memcached