http://www.couchbase.com/issues This file is an XML representation of an issue en-us 5.2.4 845 26-12-2012 http://www.couchbase.com/issues/browse/JCBC-117 Couchbase Java Client get(tmo) should not change the underlying state of the command to being timed out. It should simply respond with a TimeoutException but allow the command to continue. <br/> <br/> Specifically, when the arg-tmo (timeout passed as an argument) expires, the underlying command is marked as timed out. For example, if one waits for 50ms on the command and a response has not been received within that time, the command is now dead (&#39;TIMEDOUT&#39;, or similar) and waiting again will not help. <br/> <br/> It is understandable that some code might rely on the old behavior, so at the very least, this should be documented in &#39;BIG RED LETTERS&#39; in the get(tmo) method. JCBC-117

mention that OperationFuture.get(tmo) changes state when timeout has been reached

Improvement Major Reopened Unresolved Public Michael Nitschinger Mark Nunberg Mon, 24 Sep 2012 20:59:41 -0500 Mon, 20 May 2013 14:30:48 -0500 1.0.3 1.1.7 docs 0 0 Please explain further. Hey Mark,<br/> <br/> Can you explain in more detail what you want to see changed? When the argument is timed-out what should happen then with it?<br/> <br/> Thanks,<br/> Michael As currently designed, the client uses get() to determine timeout. This is not going to change at the moment. There&#39;s no other appropriate place internal to the client to check for this timeout of the operation at the moment. Moving this as a documentation bug Michael, I&#39;d like you to give this one a shot as your first docs bug, I&#39;ll help you with this as needed. Dependency JCBC-114 Rank 8596