<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:syn="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/">
  <channel rdf:about="http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached">
    <title>gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached</title>
    <link>http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached</link>
    <description/>
    <syn:updatePeriod>hourly</syn:updatePeriod>
    <syn:updateFrequency>1</syn:updateFrequency>
    <syn:updateBase>1901-01-01T00:00+00:00</syn:updateBase>
    <items>
      <rdf:Seq>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14259"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14258"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14257"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14256"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14255"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14254"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14253"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14252"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14251"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14250"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14249"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14248"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14247"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14246"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14245"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14244"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14243"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14242"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14241"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14240"/>
      </rdf:Seq>
    </items>
    <image rdf:resource="http://gmane.org/img/gmane-25t.png"/>
    <textinput rdf:resource=""/>
  </channel>
  <image rdf:about="http://gmane.org/img/gmane-25t.png">
    <title>Gmane</title>
    <url>http://gmane.org/img/gmane-25t.png</url>
    <link>http://gmane.org</link>
  </image>
  <item rdf:about="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14259">
    <title>Re: Issue 141 in memcached: memcached 1.4.5 - Segmentation Fault</title>
    <link>http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14259</link>
    <description>&lt;pre&gt;
Comment #13 on issue 141 by dorma...&amp;lt; at &amp;gt;rydia.net: memcached 1.4.5 -  
Segmentation Fault
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=141

please upgrade libevent and/or memcached.


&lt;/pre&gt;</description>
    <dc:creator>memcached&lt; at &gt;googlecode.com</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2012-05-25T03:40:56</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14258">
    <title>Re: Issue 141 in memcached: memcached 1.4.5 - Segmentation Fault</title>
    <link>http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14258</link>
    <description>&lt;pre&gt;
Comment #12 on issue 141 by mor...&amp;lt; at &amp;gt;gmail.com: memcached 1.4.5 -  
Segmentation Fault
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=141

adding attachment

Attachments:
memcache-1.jpg  50.8 KB


&lt;/pre&gt;</description>
    <dc:creator>memcached&lt; at &gt;googlecode.com</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2012-05-25T03:24:42</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14257">
    <title>Re: My Research on Memcached Optimization</title>
    <link>http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14257</link>
    <description>&lt;pre&gt;just some doubt...
i read about 2q algorithm that is (or was i didn´t checked) used by postgresql
did you have some experience if it´s a good 'idea' too?

about memcache... i think that policy is a 'key feature' of a cache
system... maybe could be nice to implement a option at memcache
command line to user select what policy should be used?

2012/5/24 Roberto Spadim &amp;lt;roberto&amp;lt; at &amp;gt;spadim.com.br&amp;gt;:



&lt;/pre&gt;</description>
    <dc:creator>Roberto Spadim</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2012-05-25T03:24:07</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14256">
    <title>Re: My Research on Memcached Optimization</title>
    <link>http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14256</link>
    <description>&lt;pre&gt;guy! i must talk, this is a very very nice and wonderful
implementation, congratulations!
i will try it and check if i get some increase in performance

2012/5/24 dormando &amp;lt;dormando&amp;lt; at &amp;gt;rydia.net&amp;gt;:



&lt;/pre&gt;</description>
    <dc:creator>Roberto Spadim</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2012-05-25T02:52:28</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14255">
    <title>Re: Issue 141 in memcached: memcached 1.4.5 - Segmentation Fault</title>
    <link>http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14255</link>
    <description>&lt;pre&gt;
Comment #11 on issue 141 by mor...&amp;lt; at &amp;gt;gmail.com: memcached 1.4.5 -  
Segmentation Fault
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=141

adding attachment

Attachments:
Munin __ nimbuzz.com __ mcd19.nimbuzz.com.jpg  50.8 KB


&lt;/pre&gt;</description>
    <dc:creator>memcached&lt; at &gt;googlecode.com</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2012-05-25T02:44:18</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14254">
    <title>Re: Issue 141 in memcached: memcached 1.4.5 - Segmentation Fault</title>
    <link>http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14254</link>
    <description>&lt;pre&gt;
Comment #10 on issue 141 by mor...&amp;lt; at &amp;gt;gmail.com: memcached 1.4.5 -  
Segmentation Fault
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=141

I experienced same issue with memcached 1.4.5-1 and libevent-1.4-2  
1.4.13-stable-1  (Debian Squeeze), some times memcache crashed with:[err]  
event_queue_remove: 0x2097408(fd 30) not on queue 8
[err] event_queue_remove: 0x733408(fd 30) not on queue 8
[err] event_queue_remove: 0x1fe4408(fd 30) not on queue 8
[err] event_queue_remove: 0x6bb408(fd 30) not on queue 8
[err] event_queue_remove: 0x22c3408(fd 26) not on queue 8
[err] event_queue_remove: 0x1014408(fd 26) not on queue 8
[err] event_queue_remove: 0x1283428(fd 30) not on queue 8
[err] event_queue_remove: 0xc85428(fd 30) not on queue 8
[err] event_queue_remove: 0x19e9428(fd 26) not on queue 8
[err] event_queue_remove: 0x1c12428(fd 26) not on queue 8

while having to many connections.


&lt;/pre&gt;</description>
    <dc:creator>memcached&lt; at &gt;googlecode.com</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2012-05-25T02:27:34</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14253">
    <title>Re: My Research on Memcached Optimization</title>
    <link>http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14253</link>
    <description>&lt;pre&gt;Ooh, interesting!

I was researching ways to improve the LRU a few months ago (it'll be a few
more months before I start integrating any of it). ARC was very
interesting, but unfortunately is very patented.

Even if we can't use ARC, your research on improving the LRU should be
interesting, thanks! Have you tried out the 1.6 storage engine branch,
btw?

On Thu, 24 May 2012, Yuval M wrote:


&lt;/pre&gt;</description>
    <dc:creator>dormando</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2012-05-24T19:21:05</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14252">
    <title>My Research on Memcached Optimization</title>
    <link>http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14252</link>
    <description>&lt;pre&gt;Hello,

My name is Yuval Meir and I am a M.Sc student in Tel Aviv University.
As part of my academic research I have implemented the ARC (Adaptive
Replacement Cache) caching policy in Memcached
I ran benchmarks using a modified version of memaslap and the results were
very good: cache misses were reduced by up to to 30% on some loads, and in
terms of run time, memory usage and CPU usage, my implementation performed
similar to the original Memcached.
I attached the diff (based on Memcached 1.4.13) and the results I have so
far in the excel file (note that it has several tabs).

ARC was introduced in the following publication by Nimrod Megiddo,
Dharmendra Modha:
http://www.almaden.ibm.com/cs/people/dmodha/arcfast.pdf
which was published in USENIX 2003.

I will be very glad to get you reviewes and comments.

Regards,

Yuval Meir
Computer Science department
Tel-Aviv University
&lt;/pre&gt;</description>
    <dc:creator>Yuval M</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2012-05-24T19:12:33</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14251">
    <title>Re: Issue 272 in memcached: Memcached "hung" in do_item_alloc</title>
    <link>http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14251</link>
    <description>&lt;pre&gt;
Comment #6 on issue 272 by dorma...&amp;lt; at &amp;gt;rydia.net: Memcached "hung" in  
do_item_alloc
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=272

Any updates?


&lt;/pre&gt;</description>
    <dc:creator>memcached&lt; at &gt;googlecode.com</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2012-05-23T21:04:04</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14250">
    <title>Memcached runs OutOfMemory under race condition</title>
    <link>http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14250</link>
    <description>&lt;pre&gt;I revised memcached1.4.13 to make cas ID unique between server
reboots. But It seemed that two memcached instances on a server has
eaten up almost all memory under stressing load.
1. OS: centerOS5.3, 64bit
2. memcached startup command:
/opt/memcached1.4.13.0503b/bin/memcached -u nobody -d -m 4096 -c 1024 -
l 192.168.8.224 -p 11211 -v &amp;gt;  /var/log/memcached-11211.log 2&amp;gt;&amp;amp;1
/opt/memcached1.4.13.0503b/bin/memcached -u nobody -d -m 4096 -c 1024 -
l 192.168.8.224 -p 11211 -v &amp;gt;  /var/log/memcached-11211.log 2&amp;gt;&amp;amp;1
3. Memory usage:
[root&amp;lt; at &amp;gt;dell1-12 ~]# free -m

             total       used       free     shared    buffers
cached

Mem:         16044      15986         58          0         85
24

-/+ buffers/cache:      15876        168

Swap:         7820       6911        908

Stats on one instance:
stats
STAT pid 32205

STAT uptime 60090

STAT time 1336177937

STAT version 1.4.13.0503b

STAT libevent 1.4.12-stable

STAT pointer_size 64

STAT rusage_user 1125.852844

STAT rusage_system 2174.782382

STAT curr_connections 10

STAT total_connections 18

STAT connection_structures 11

STAT reserved_fds 20

STAT cmd_get 249567553

STAT cmd_set 2698828

STAT cmd_flush 0

STAT cmd_touch 0

STAT get_hits 241304080

STAT get_misses 8263473

STAT delete_misses 1249006

STAT delete_hits 1236936

STAT incr_misses 0

STAT incr_hits 0

STAT decr_misses 0

STAT decr_hits 0

STAT cas_misses 0

STAT cas_hits 0

STAT cas_badval 0

STAT touch_hits 0

STAT touch_misses 0

STAT auth_cmds 0

STAT auth_errors 0

STAT bytes_read 20934057174

STAT bytes_written 32731347667

STAT limit_maxbytes 4294967296

STAT accepting_conns 1

STAT listen_disabled_num 0

STAT threads 4

STAT conn_yields 77

STAT hash_power_level 20

STAT hash_bytes 8388608

STAT hash_is_expanding 0

STAT expired_unfetched 488121

STAT evicted_unfetched 0

STAT bytes 2909361795

STAT curr_items 803791

STAT total_items 2698828

STAT evictions 0

STAT reclaimed 492946

END

I am not sure whether my change caused this fatal issue. This only
happens when a large amount of objects are put into memcached. Here is
major change code:
uint64_t get_cas_id(void) {
    struct timeval tm;
    gettimeofday(&amp;amp;tm, NULL);
    return (uint64_t)tm.tv_sec &amp;lt;&amp;lt; 32 | (uint64_t)tm.tv_usec;
}
I can put this customized version somewhere if needed. Hope someone
can help me. Thanks in advance.

&lt;/pre&gt;</description>
    <dc:creator>Smiling Ai</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2012-05-05T02:36:18</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14249">
    <title>Version 1.0.8 of libmemcached released</title>
    <link>http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14249</link>
    <description>&lt;pre&gt;Hi!

Added support for setting options via ENV variable LIBMEMCACHED. Fix corner case on last used result. Bug fixes.
http://launchpad.net/libmemcached

Cheers,
-Brian&lt;/pre&gt;</description>
    <dc:creator>Brian Aker</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2012-05-23T07:42:50</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14248">
    <title>Re: Algorithm for automatic cache invalidation</title>
    <link>http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14248</link>
    <description>&lt;pre&gt;i readed some nosql features at mysql and mariadb (a mysql trunk) they
are starting some nosql/cache solutions, could be nice check it
i know that oracle company is a 'problem'/'solution' to mysql open
source version, check others trunks, mariadb is a nice trunk and is
more 'opensource' with some interesting features
the memcache + db solution is nice, but i think in futures a more
unified solution will exists just wait or develop it =)


2012/5/22 Jakub Łopuszański &amp;lt;qbolec&amp;lt; at &amp;gt;gmail.com&amp;gt;:



&lt;/pre&gt;</description>
    <dc:creator>Roberto Spadim</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2012-05-23T02:52:56</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14247">
    <title>Re: Algorithm for automatic cache invalidation</title>
    <link>http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14247</link>
    <description>&lt;pre&gt;Well this is already deployed to a production system and works just great. 
The reason this is faster is that in some situations you can not easily 
shard a database as some queries would cross shards boundaries. Of course 
this means that a regular DB will not scale unless you change your queries. 
On the other hand a cache is easier to distribute/shard/scale.
It is also easier (and in fact I do that on production) to have a memcache 
runing on each frontend machine (while this would be a strange idea to put 
shards of database on frontends which are usually diskless).
Of course one could argue, that you should just avoid complicated queries 
and shard everything, but even then, the cost of communicating over network 
between a frontend and mysql backend can be larger than a cost of a single 
multiget to a memcached (even if the network latency is similar, I believe 
that network stack of memcahed is one of the fastest).

In my particular example I have 6 frontend diskless machines, each running 
apache2 and memached, and single database and single global memcached. Most 
queries are resolved without any network communication at all, as they 
result in local cache hit.

I think that developers of mysql have no way (or incentive) to build as 
powerfull cache into a database, as no single database has not as much RAM, 
not as many network cards and not as many CPUs as a cloud of 55 memcaches 
used in nk.pl


W dniu piątek, 11 maja 2012 19:57:58 UTC+2 użytkownik Perrin Harkins 
napisał:
&lt;/pre&gt;</description>
    <dc:creator>Jakub Łopuszański</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2012-05-22T22:08:07</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14246">
    <title>Re: Issue 274 in memcached: typo in memcached wiki</title>
    <link>http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14246</link>
    <description>&lt;pre&gt;
Comment #3 on issue 274 by vlak...&amp;lt; at &amp;gt;gmail.com: typo in memcached wiki
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=274

http://code.google.com/p/memcached/wiki/NewUserInternals

s/chukn/chunk


&lt;/pre&gt;</description>
    <dc:creator>memcached&lt; at &gt;googlecode.com</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2012-05-20T17:46:31</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14245">
    <title>Re: Issue 274 in memcached: typo in memcached wiki</title>
    <link>http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14245</link>
    <description>&lt;pre&gt;
Comment #2 on issue 274 by vlak...&amp;lt; at &amp;gt;gmail.com: typo in memcached wiki
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=274

Sorry that's not "512" but "5*12". The asterisk probably tricked the  
formatting engine.


&lt;/pre&gt;</description>
    <dc:creator>memcached&lt; at &gt;googlecode.com</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2012-05-20T17:40:10</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14244">
    <title>Re: Issue 274 in memcached: typo in memcached wiki</title>
    <link>http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14244</link>
    <description>&lt;pre&gt;
Comment #1 on issue 274 by vlak...&amp;lt; at &amp;gt;gmail.com: typo in memcached wiki
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=274

another typo:

http://code.google.com/p/memcached/wiki/NewConfiguringServer

s/maxiumum/maximum

also noticed this strange formatting:
... you may receive is 5 &amp;lt;b&amp;gt;12. Always leave a few extra slots ...
should rather be:
... you may receive is 512. &amp;lt;b&amp;gt;Always leave a few extra slots ...


&lt;/pre&gt;</description>
    <dc:creator>memcached&lt; at &gt;googlecode.com</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2012-05-20T17:38:30</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14243">
    <title>Issue 274 in memcached: typo in memcached wiki</title>
    <link>http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14243</link>
    <description>&lt;pre&gt;Status: New
Owner: ----
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium

New issue 274 by vlak...&amp;lt; at &amp;gt;gmail.com: typo in memcached wiki
http://code.google.com/p/memcached/issues/detail?id=274

http://code.google.com/p/memcached/wiki/NewInstallFromPackage

s/rececnt/recent


&lt;/pre&gt;</description>
    <dc:creator>memcached&lt; at &gt;googlecode.com</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2012-05-20T17:31:39</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14242">
    <title>Re: Flush / TTL issue</title>
    <link>http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14242</link>
    <description>&lt;pre&gt;
cmd_flush increasing means your application, or some cron, or some human,
or some internet script (if your instance isn't protected) is issuing the
command "flush_all" over and over. Also, your version is very old, but I
doubt that's what's causing your flushes to happen :)

-Dormando

&lt;/pre&gt;</description>
    <dc:creator>dormando</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2012-05-11T22:35:16</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14241">
    <title>Flush / TTL issue</title>
    <link>http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14241</link>
    <description>&lt;pre&gt;We are currently having an issue with our memcache server that appears
to be flushing data even though nothing in the apps are flushing data.
I can set something with a TTL of 2 weeks yet it is only lasting in
memcache for a max of something around 30 minutes.

Print out of getstats in one of the php applications shows the
following:

Array
(
    [pid] =&amp;gt; 24793
    [uptime] =&amp;gt; 373575
    [time] =&amp;gt; 1336770386
    [version] =&amp;gt; 1.4.2
    [pointer_size] =&amp;gt; 64
    [rusage_user] =&amp;gt; 4077.050000
    [rusage_system] =&amp;gt; 12475.330000
    [curr_connections] =&amp;gt; 1143
    [total_connections] =&amp;gt; 89011605
    [connection_structures] =&amp;gt; 1616
    [cmd_get] =&amp;gt; 438522590
    [cmd_set] =&amp;gt; 101189934
    [cmd_flush] =&amp;gt; 863
    [get_hits] =&amp;gt; 435589695
    [get_misses] =&amp;gt; 188087908
    [delete_misses] =&amp;gt; 27221748
    [delete_hits] =&amp;gt; 610097
    [incr_misses] =&amp;gt; 0
    [incr_hits] =&amp;gt; 0
    [decr_misses] =&amp;gt; 0
    [decr_hits] =&amp;gt; 0
    [cas_misses] =&amp;gt; 0
    [cas_hits] =&amp;gt; 0
    [cas_badval] =&amp;gt; 0
    [bytes_read] =&amp;gt; 71199529191
    [bytes_written] =&amp;gt; 955401557632
    [limit_maxbytes] =&amp;gt; 10737418240
    [accepting_conns] =&amp;gt; 1
    [listen_disabled_num] =&amp;gt; 0
    [threads] =&amp;gt; 4
    [conn_yields] =&amp;gt; 157
    [bytes] =&amp;gt; 6796086722
    [curr_items] =&amp;gt; 12613469
    [total_items] =&amp;gt; 100944174
    [evictions] =&amp;gt; 0
)

There are no evictions so the data isnt filling up (we have set a 10GB
max and there is currently 6GB of data currently). However flushes are
rising and are at 863 as of this post. Is there something going on
that we are not seeing, or a setting somewhere? Any help would be
appreciated.

&lt;/pre&gt;</description>
    <dc:creator>Mentch</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2012-05-11T21:31:16</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14240">
    <title>Re: REMOVE ME</title>
    <link>http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14240</link>
    <description>&lt;pre&gt;Sorry everyone, I was following the instructions in
http://support.google.com/groups/bin/answer.py?hl=en&amp;amp;answer=46608 and didn't
expect "REMOVE ME" to be broadcast to the group like an ordinary message.


&lt;/pre&gt;</description>
    <dc:creator>Erik Seaberg</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2012-05-11T21:03:02</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14239">
    <title>REMOVE ME</title>
    <link>http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached/14239</link>
    <description>&lt;pre&gt;


&lt;/pre&gt;</description>
    <dc:creator>Erik Seaberg</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2012-05-11T20:58:32</dc:date>
  </item>
  <textinput rdf:about="http://search.gmane.org/?group=$group=gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached">
    <title>Search Engine</title>
    <description>Search the mailing list at Gmane</description>
    <name>query</name>
    <link>http://search.gmane.org/?group=$group=gmane.comp.web.cache.memcached</link>
  </textinput>
</rdf:RDF>

