On Aug 30, 2007, at 15:54 , dormando wrote:
(Just tossing out an idea, I've already discredited myself as
useless here!)
Would a "minimal recommended feature set" be along the lines of
acceptable?
I think that's really what we're talking about. We're just trying
stuff to figure out what that is.
I can imagine not having at least a common default to be insanity
inducing. IMHO it's probably okay to request clients at least
implement the crc32 over such and such details as long as they
default to them. Then you're still free to implement something with
higher performance characteristics.
On your last bit ... uhhhh, no strong opinion. I think the idea
here is to do "something" which makes people feel comfortable to
actually *use* consistent hashing in some form. Presently larger
sites get bitten by the "I just added another memcached instance
and my shit got all slow!" more and more often. Lets help spare
sysadmins from having to do memcached maintenance at 4am? :)
Is anyone who's uncomfortable with consistent hashing actually using
it for the same keys from multiple different client implementations?
If so, wouldn't it be valuable to standardize on flags and data
encoding or something first (this was briefly mentioned in a meeting)?
I use flags to indicate encoding mechanisms in my default
transcoder. Some of the bits indicate data type, and some of the
bits indicate special processing features (e.g. gzip).
For anyone who is accessing data from different languages, what is
the intermediate format? What kinds of things are you doing with it?
--
Dustin Sallings
