On Sun, Jun 1, 2008 at 12:49 AM, Dustin Sallings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > That's sort of why I responded. I read ``feature-complete'' as > ``supporting all features.'' Well, technically it supports all features in the 1.2.4 server. :-) (Oh okay, it doesn't support the UDP protocol, but... who does?) > In particular, CAS isn't fully complete in 1.2.5 and will probably > not be backported to the text protocol due to the protocol disruption it'd > likely introduce (we do CAS on append, prepend, set, add, update, and delete > at least as well as returning CAS values from all commands). > Sounds reasonable, it's pretty evident that CAS is an afterthought with the separate gets and cas commands. I actually wondered about the reason for the binary protocol, I would guess that the difference in parsing variable-length text strings and fixed-length byte arrays is totally negligible compared to network latency, but I guess it makes it easier to add things like CAS to everything. :-) > There seem to be very few people with Windows server interest. Do > you have any time to put into helping memcached continue working on the > Windows platform? Yes, it's pretty sad actually that it hasn't caught on very well in the Windows world. Sadly, I'm not a (good) C programmer, so I can't help. At my company we're pretty concerned about the bad performance of the Windows port of the memcached server, it affects our website Nonoba, so we might end up investing some resource sin getting it to work better, but I really can't promise anything. It's definitely in our interest to have a good working version of the server for Windows though, so we'll see. I suspect that the problems are related to the Windows port of libevent, and that might be pretty tricky to track down, and not something I would want to do with my meager C skills. :-) /Henrik Schröder
