Hackathon notes (non-binary protocol thread)

[BUSTARRET, Jean-francois]

I'm not a very experienced C coder, but I'll try to share some ideas... Please be tolerant

- add "char* tags" to the _stritem struct
- store tags in a comma/whatever-delimited string : ",tag1,tag2,tag3," (space and comma being reserved), the client being eventually responsible for formatting the tag string
- modify the protocol to add an optional tag parameter <command name> <key> <flags> <exptime> <bytes>[ <tags>]\r\n
- add a new deletetag command ?
- delete items using the same rule approach as described by Dustin, strpos-ing(",tag,") instead of regexp-ing the key
Multi-tag deletes can be split in multiple rules

IMHO, limiting the max number of tags and the max size of a tag would not be a problem.

JFB


-----Message d'origine-----
De : Paul Querna [mailto:chip at corelands.com] 
Envoyé : mardi 17 juillet 2007 19:01
À : Tobias Lütke
Cc : BUSTARRET, Jean-francois; memcached at lists.danga.com
Objet : Re: Hackathon notes (non-binary protocol thread)

Tobias Lütke wrote:
> Agreed,
> 
> I think the tagging solves the same problem as the wildcard deletes in 
> a more elegant way. The concept is so simple that you can explain it 
> in a single sentence which is a indicator of a good feature.
> 
> On 7/16/07, BUSTARRET, Jean-francois <jfbustarret at wat.tv> wrote:
>>
>> What about tagging (as discussed last week on the mailing-list) ?
>> IMHO, it would be more useful than wildcard deletes/namespaces/...
>>
>

Well, what it came down to is that we had very simple ideas for how wildcard deletes could be implemented, but no one seemed to have any suggestions how to best do tagging.  Have any ideas for the list?

Thanks,

-Paul