Hackathon notes (non-binary protocol thread)

[BUSTARRET, Jean-francois]

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Dustin Sallings [mailto:dustin at spy.net] 
> On Jul 18, 2007, at 0:42, BUSTARRET, Jean-francois wrote:
> 
> > We could store tags within the key... But the get would 
> have to ignore 
> > the tags.
> >
> > set key,tag,tag,tag value...
> > get key => value
> >
> 
> 	No, that doesn't seem like a good idea at all.  I meant 
> store and access it the same way (if you can build the key 
> and tags when you're setting it, you can do it again when you 
> look it up).
> 
> 	The goal of suggesting that was to determine whether 
> it'd be sufficient for people who are looking to do things with tags.

Nope. That won't work. The goal of tags is to be able to manage
dependencies that can't be included within the key.

ie : listA includes itemA, itemB, itemC. listA cache entry would be
tagged with itemA, itemB & itemC tags.
You obviously wouldn't want to include such tags within the key...