We have just such a thing at Linden Lab, too. I was appalled when I heard about it, but then looked under the hood at a bunch of very convenient features. And it's pretty nice to be able to check your caches with curl.
The mapping from memcached onto HTTP is really non-obvious. HTTP can be a beast of a protocol -- caching, content-types, the various verbs, and so on. These are really decisions that you'd want to make within your own organization. Aaron On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 10:17 AM, John Reilly <[email protected]> wrote: > You could easily develop an http-to-memcached proxy to allow this. All the > partitioning logic could exist in the memcache client embedded in your > proxy. This might make some sense because then you would not have to > implement the partitioning logic into your clients. I would say the answer > to the question is no (memcached does not need to support http). > > > On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 6:54 AM, j.s. mammen <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Folks, lets not get bogged down by REST defined by Roy Fielding in >> 2000. >> >> My question was simple. >> Here it is again, rephrased. >> >> Do we need to implement a memcached layer whereby we can access the >> cached objects by using HTTP protocol. Here is an example of getting a >> cached object from a server >> GET [server]/mc/object/id1 >> >> Hope the question is clearer now? >> >> On Jul 29, 4:30 pm, Henrik Schröder <[email protected]> wrote: >> > I would assume he's talking about making memcached expose some sort of >> > simple web service api over http. >> > >> > Although, you could argue that both the ascii protocol and binary >> > protocol >> > are restful, the sure seem to me to fit the definition pretty closely. >> > >> > /Henrik >> > >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 12:56, Aaron Stone <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > What's a ReST protocol? ReST is a model. >> > >> > > On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 8:42 PM, jsm <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > > What I meant was to add a REST protocol to memcached layer, just >> > > > like >> > > > you have a binary protocol and ascii. >> > > > Its up to the user to decide which protocol to use when accessing >> > > > memcached objects. >> > > > Regards, >> > > > J.S.Mammen >> > >> > > > On Jul 29, 1:49 am, Aaron Stone <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > >> On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 8:37 AM, jsm <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > > >> > On Jul 28, 8:02 pm, Rajesh Nair <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > >> >> 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? >> > >> > > >> > Basically to be able to use without binding to any particular >> > > >> > language. >> > >> > > >> I read this as requesting memcached native support for structured >> > > >> values (e.g. hashes, lists, etc.) -- is that what you meant? >> > >> > > >> Aaron >> > >> > > >> >> 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. > >
