Basically whatever you guys make standard I'll put into the branch. The pget and pdelete were just the simplest thing I could come up with that would do the job. What do you think?
The rget command I copied from memcachedb. The only thing I don't like about it is that I think the end key should be optional so that you don't have to specify a maximal key if you want to iterate through the whole cache. -Josh On Apr 13, 9:44 pm, Brian Aker <br...@tangent.org> wrote: > Hi! > > Dustin and I were talking about adding this sort of command as an > option to the protocol description for Memcached. If we could come up > with a standard, I would love to add it to libmemcached. > > Cheers, > -Brian > > On Apr 13, 2009, at 9:26 PM, Mike Panchenko wrote: > > > > > Interesting... have you tested it with multiple clients? Do you > > think there's any reason to believe that more clients would cause > > degradation? > > > Have you considered making this an option? I'm assuming the most > > common response to this will be "Memcached works very well for what > > it was designed. Don't mess with that." > > > Mike. > > > On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 9:10 PM, Josh Dybnis <jdyb...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > memcached-prefix is an experimental fork off of the memcached 1.3 > > development branch. It adds commands pget and pdelete that operate on > > ranges of keys having a common prefix. The new commands can be used as > > a simple namespace mechanism. It also adds a memcachedb compatible > > rget command. > > > Performance is very close to the standard memcached (see the > > benchmarks on the project page). Space usage is also roughly > > unchanged. > > > Project page:http://jdybnis.github.com/memcached/ > > -- > _______________________________________________________ > Brian "Krow" Aker, brian at tangent.org > Seattle, Washingtonhttp://krow.net/ <-- > Mehttp://tangent.org/ <-- Software > _______________________________________________________ > You can't grep a dead tree.
