You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
We need to signal to the client that in some configurations, the CAS will only accept read requests. All write requests will result in errors.
Given that we are currently advertising
// Describes the server/instance capabilities for updating the action cache.messageActionCacheUpdateCapabilities {
boolupdate_enabled=1;
}
in CacheCapabilities proto. I was thinking that we could simply add another identical field for CASUpdateCapabilities.
However, such a field would default to false, which is troublesome for backward compatibility. And doing bool is_readonly = 1; feels out of spec. Looking for feedback on this design.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Use an enum where 0 indicates it’s writable? Or place it in a nested message. If the message is absent, clients may assume legacy behaviour where the CAS is writable.
I think the right course is an enum with UNKNOWN=0, WRITEABLE, READ-ONLY as the values. It's possible there are other CAS read-only CAS implementations (e.g., local caches), and we shouldn't extend the API in a way that invalidates their position by default.
We need to signal to the client that in some configurations, the CAS will only accept read requests. All write requests will result in errors.
Given that we are currently advertising
in
CacheCapabilities
proto. I was thinking that we could simply add another identical field for CASUpdateCapabilities.However, such a field would default to
false
, which is troublesome for backward compatibility. And doingbool is_readonly = 1;
feels out of spec. Looking for feedback on this design.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: