no reply patch
Tomash Brechko
tomash.brechko at gmail.com
Tue Feb 5 07:15:32 UTC 2008
On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 19:14:21 -0800, Brian Aker wrote:
> The patch looks fine, though I think you should move this:
>
> + if (c->noreply) {
> + c->noreply = false;
> + conn_set_state(c, conn_read);
> + return;
> + }
> +
>
> ... to being after the verbose if () since without it debugging
> problems is going to be a real pain.
Thanks for looking into this. Re your comment, the piece
if (settings.verbose > 1)
fprintf(stderr, ">%d %s\n", c->sfd, str);
is the debug message about what will be send to the client. But with
'noreply' nothing will be send, so I avoid this message too. Also,
not seeing the result actually stresses the fast that with 'noreply'
you can't be sure of the command outcome ;).
It could be implemented either way of course, but to my personal taste
(have no technical reasons) this doesn't have to be fixed. Thanks
anyway.
> One thought I had with this is that you could use the token you have
> added to the server as an additional action verb for future commands.
Indeed, the 'more' keyword I mentioned in other mail may be used in
this place, as it is mutually exclusive with 'noreply'.
--
Tomash Brechko
More information about the memcached
mailing list