Assigned
Status Update
No update yet.
Comments
ng...@google.com
Thanks for posting your issue here!
You are correct that the memcache module does not implement the common `append` method. The source documentation[1] does however state that this API "Provides memcached-alike API to application developers". This does not imply that this API is congruent with memcached. As there is no mention of the `append` method in the documentation, I don't think this sets an expectation of their being one. If however, you feel this is unclear and have some specific ideas on how this could be made clearer, feel free to rate the above documentation page[1] using the stars in the upper righthand corner. You will be given an option to provide written feedback which is always welcome!
To the best of my knowledge with the APIs provided, the way to effectively append data to an existing value is a get/set pair which is arguably not as convenient. If you would like to see `append` implemented in the memcache module, please provide a thorough business case and we can change this defect report into a feature request for said implementation.
[1]:https://cloud.google.com/appengine/docs/python/refdocs/google.appengine.api.memcache
You are correct that the memcache module does not implement the common `append` method. The source documentation[1] does however state that this API "Provides memcached-alike API to application developers". This does not imply that this API is congruent with memcached. As there is no mention of the `append` method in the documentation, I don't think this sets an expectation of their being one. If however, you feel this is unclear and have some specific ideas on how this could be made clearer, feel free to rate the above documentation page[1] using the stars in the upper righthand corner. You will be given an option to provide written feedback which is always welcome!
To the best of my knowledge with the APIs provided, the way to effectively append data to an existing value is a get/set pair which is arguably not as convenient. If you would like to see `append` implemented in the memcache module, please provide a thorough business case and we can change this defect report into a feature request for said implementation.
[1]:
[Deleted User] <[Deleted User]>
append provides atomicity which is not possible with get/set so the "thorough" business case is to append a string atomically. It exists on standard memcache which may prove its usefulness.
@Documentation: It feels like being at fault for not reading the fine print. If it's named "memcache" but doesn't work like memcache I think it's fair to ask the difference to be documented (i.e. what's not supported) so that the client can make an informal decision before to use it. A good example is GQL doc[0] which makes it clear that GQL is not SQL(i.e. is more limited) in the first paragraphs.
[0]https://cloud.google.com/datastore/docs/apis/gql/gql_reference
@Documentation: It feels like being at fault for not reading the fine print. If it's named "memcache" but doesn't work like memcache I think it's fair to ask the difference to be documented (i.e. what's not supported) so that the client can make an informal decision before to use it. A good example is GQL doc[0] which makes it clear that GQL is not SQL(i.e. is more limited) in the first paragraphs.
[0]
ng...@google.com
Thanks for the constructive feedback. I could not determine from your comment if you had in fact sent feedback regarding the documentation mentioned so I submitted the feedback on your behalf. Should you find any other documentation ambiguities in the future, feel free to voice your concerns that way as well.
Regarding `append` implementation, I have forwarded this request to the engineering team. We will update this issue with any progress updates and a resolution.
I've changed this defect report into a feature request for appropriate tracking purposes. Should you have any additional details or justification to add in the meantime, feel free to post them here as well.
Regarding `append` implementation, I have forwarded this request to the engineering team. We will update this issue with any progress updates and a resolution.
I've changed this defect report into a feature request for appropriate tracking purposes. Should you have any additional details or justification to add in the meantime, feel free to post them here as well.
Description