> Hi all, > I've made a few little experiments with Memcached, and it fits my needs well > for 90% of my web application that is a simple CGI or FastCGI with > request/response services. The rest of my web app is a set of long-running > daemons that subscribe to a message queue and > wait for events they're interested in. > > Has there been any thought put in to having a publish/subscribe or other > async notifications as part of the Memcached protocol? I can imagine a > client requesting a "SUBSCRIBE key-name-or-prefix" from all their servers so > that they get back "UPDATED key value" or > "DELETED key value" from each server as it detects a modification to that key > or prefix. > > If there is interest, I would be happy to work on the patch myself, given any > guidance you can offer. > > Thanks for Memcached, and looking forward to your reply, > Michael.
That's something that hasn't typically meshed well with memcached, but I'm not actually opposed to adding something like it. I've been doing the lock splitting work (which we're trying to move into the 1.6 tree) and intend to add actual features on top of it. Your best bet would be to write some test extensions using a 1.6 storage engine, then we can evaluate how to work it better. 1.6 has TAP for subscription streams, and it might be reusable for key subscription? I'm not actually sure offhand :P
