Gavin, If you go by the strict sense of word, HTTP protocol is not a pre-requisite for REST service. It requires a protocol which supports linking entities through URIs. It is very much possible to implement a RESTful service by coming up with own URI protocol for memcached messages
something like : mc://<memcached-cluster>/messages/<key> and the transport layer can be pretty much the same TCP to not add any overhead. JSM, What is the value-add you are looking from the RESTful version of the memcached API? Regards, Rajesh Nair On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 8:13 PM, Gavin M. Roy <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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. >> > >
