dustin at spy.net
Mon Sep 17 07:33:28 UTC 2007
On Sep 17, 2007, at 0:31, Chris Goffinet wrote:
> 1) Okay. Does it make sense then to just implement a 'revision'
> into the item struct? That way we can just revision++ on new 'set'?
I think you'd need a global counter. You wouldn't want a set ->
delete -> set to tell you that your value is the same between those
> 2) I'll add support for those 3 again so you can see what happened.
> I'll look into draining the output correctly so client's won't have
> an issue with this.
There's a drain state, but it ends strangely for the text protocol,
More information about the memcached