On Jan 11, 10:10 am, Erich <[email protected]> wrote:
> 3. Binary protocol. > Cons: > - client writing is a bit more complex (parsing etc) I did the bin protocol for memcached (two servers and two clients) and found it to be considerably easier. > - not telnet debuggable (some will argue that writing a reference > telent like client is a good first step anyway) We kept both in memcached (on the same port for better or worse). > 4. Message batching. By this I mean allowing more than one message > per packet. Im pretty sure this would be OK now, but I think it should > be explicitly stated. This allows for some performance tweaks, > particularly client end (when combined with "stacking"). I'd expect this to work anyway. I did it with my memcached client and it worked flawlessly. It *did* expose bugs that were introduced to the server later on, though. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "beanstalk-talk" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/beanstalk-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
