dormando at rydia.net
Thu Feb 14 00:11:36 UTC 2008
> Yeah, I suppose I don't actually *need* something like that, but new
> commands keep coming up. It'd be good to keep up with what's in a given
See my response to aaron. I'm actually okay with a 'caps' command, but
there're caveats :\
> I'm thinking something near this (in some kind of weird cthon
> char * key_map;
> int start_opaque, i;
> start_opaque = gen_opaque();
> for key in keys:
> [make request]
> for res in responses:
> char *key = key_map[res.opaque - start_opaque];
Yeah, that's the straightforward easy route I imagine. So:
- If this is _within_ the library, it's assuming all of the keys have
been passed in as a list already. It also requires a memory allocation
or buffer just for the mapping (which might not be so bad on its own if
- If this is _outside_ of the library, it's even easier, since you can
map the opaque almost directly into the original data structure.
It looks like brian's trying to map the opaque from _within_
libmemcached. Since it has callback interfaces, it doesn't necessarily
understand how to map everything back, or what the counts are.
Although, brian; if you can make 'noreply' work, then why doesn't a
simple opaque work? The results will be out of order either way; but
with key return you'll have to do a hash mapping to return the keys into
order, or simply return the keys directly to the application.
> I won't argue with that point, but I'm *really* interesting in
> tagging my client as a 2.0 release and retiring in the mountains somewhere.
The great mountain half pipe? :)
More information about the memcached