|memcache memory limit||skyhopper||3/19/09 11:44 PM|
is there a memory limit for the memcached process ? i want to run it
with -m 4096 option , is that possible ?
|Re: memcache memory limit||Dustin||3/20/09 12:01 AM|
What happens when you try?
|Re: memcache memory limit||Sudipta Banerjee||3/20/09 12:05 AM|
actually ..i wanted to procure more ram. but someone just said that it doesn't allow more than 2 gig. thats why i wanted to confirm. right now i am on a 2 gig machine. but want to run memcached with 4 gigs of ram
|Re: memcache memory limit||Clint Webb||3/20/09 12:08 AM|
Well if the machine had 4gb of ram, I wouldn't use 4096 for the -m option. As I am sure that the OS and other bits are probably using some memory there. I'd do 3800 or something, but depends on what else is being used on that server.--
"Be excellent to each other"
|Re: memcache memory limit||Sudipta Banerjee||3/20/09 12:10 AM|
it has 8 gigs of ram and its 64 bit
its going to be dedicated to memcached
|Re: memcache memory limit||Trond Norbye||3/20/09 12:36 AM|
> it has 8 gigs of ram and its 64 bit
Compile memcached as a 64bit binary and you should be able to use as
|Re: memcache memory limit||JC||3/20/09 1:51 AM|
By the way, has anyone already tried to quantify in a *more
scientific* manner the actual extra memory we should let on a box to
be sure memcached won't swap ?
I guess memcached related overhead should be proportional to the
expected number of connection and their traffic. I guess this is about
the same for the OS with its internal buffers. But I must confess that
so far, I don't know the exact multiplying factor(s) ...
|Re: memcache memory limit||Dormando||3/20/09 11:45 AM|
It's at least "a couple megs". It depends on how many parallel connections
you have, and the typical size of your read buffers.
If you do a lot of large multi-gets, you'll use more ram than otherwise.