While the idea is noble, there's already APIs for every language under the sun, and the ASCII protocol is plaintext, so you can just use sockets instead of sockets+http required for a RESTful interface.
On Jul 28, 2010, at 8:16 AM, jsm <mamm...@gmail.com> wrote: > Gavin, > You are right about the overhead and also saw that API's exist for > most of the languages as well. > I thought REST API would make memcached language agnostic. > I would like to hear from the community if the REST API should be > pursued or not? > > On Jul 28, 7:43 pm, "Gavin M. Roy" <g...@myyearbook.com> wrote: >> Why add the HTTP protocol overhead? REST/HTTP would add ~75Mbps of >> additional traffic at 100k gets per second by saying there's a rough 100 >> byte overhead per request over the ASCII protocol. I base the 100 bytes by >> the HTTP GET request, minimal request headers and minimal response >> headers. The binary protocol is very terse in comparison to the ASCII >> protocol. In addition netcat or telnet works as good as curl for drop dead >> simplicity. Don't get me wrong, it would be neat, but shouldn't be >> considered in moderately well used memcached environments. >> >> Regards, >> >> Gavin >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 8:43 AM, jsm <mamm...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Anyone writing or planning to write a REST API for memcached? >>> If no such plan, I would be interested in writing a REST API. >>> Any suggestions, comments welcome.
