> problem:
> today i need 4 packets to make 'lock'/'unlock' using memcache
> i need to use less ROM/CPU/RAM/network at client side
>
> solution:
> 1) make server side lock function with 2 packet (with atomic operations)
> 2) make a proxy if function = lock/unlock, proxy make these packets to
> server (i don't have atomic here, but i can implement with a big work
> on protocol, maybe a new memcached hehe)
>
> i will try the second one without atomic (today i'm using it, i have
> some problems, but client side workaround it with more packets...
> (retry) )
> the first is better (i don't need a proxy, i have less packets, use
> less cpu, ram, rom, time)
>
> packets:
> LOCK
> add value (1 packet sent by client, 1 packet sent by server)
> if no error (end here)
> if value exist
> read value (1packet sent by client, 1 packet sent by server)
> if value=my value (my lock) if not (not my lock)
>
> UNLOCK
> read value (1packet sent by client, 1 packet sent by server)
> if value != my value
> (end here)
> delete value (1packet sent by client, 1 packet sent by server)
> (end here)

I think he means to step back a bit, and describe what problem it is that
lead you to needing to access memcached from a PIC.

ie; what is the specific work that the PIC is doing which needs
synchronization and perhaps repeated accesses to memcached?

Reply via email to