When's the PBC API going to be brought up to snuff?

Andrew Thompson andrew at hijacked.us
Thu Apr 21 16:43:45 EDT 2011


On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 01:36:47PM -0700, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 2:28 PM, Andrew Thompson <andrew at hijacked.us> wrote:
> 
> > Changes include conditional get [{if_modified, VClock}], conditional put
> > [if_none_match], [if_not_modified] and a way to get the metadata of an
> > object without its value; [head].
> >
> 
> It's a good start, thanks. One particular case of conditional PUT that I
> would find very useful is "put only if this bucket/key does not already
> exist", which I can achieve using HTTP via "If-None-Match: *", and now via
> the new if_none_match on RpbPutReq. It seems weird to transplant the
> relevant HTTP header names to the protobuf specifications of RpbPutReq and
> RpbGetReq, though, as those names make no sense outside of a HTTP context,
> and they don't mirror the HTTP semantics anyway. If if_none_match was
> if_missing, for instance, that would reduce the cognitive dissonance.

I can certainly rename them, I wasn't sure if it was better to try to
approximate the REST API or not. I'm happy to make that change and
consider any other suggestions now before the API gets merged into
master and we have to start considering backwards compatability.

if_none_match and head seem like the ones that make less sense outside
the concept of the REST API, I think if_[not]_modified is fairly clear.

Thoughts?

Andrew




More information about the riak-users mailing list