Difference between revisions of "Zaqar/specs/api/v2.0"
< Zaqar
(→Marconi API v2.0) |
(→Marconi API v2.0) |
||
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Brainstorming | Brainstorming | ||
− | * | + | * Remove getting one or more messages by ID |
− | + | ** Isn't terribly useful to users, and may (TBD) provide for performance optimizations in the drivers | |
− | ** | ||
* Migrate to topic-based semantics. | * Migrate to topic-based semantics. | ||
** Can post a single message to multiple topics in one request | ** Can post a single message to multiple topics in one request | ||
Line 19: | Line 18: | ||
** Con: if an error occurs, there isn't an obvious media type the client accepts to use in reporting structured error information | ** Con: if an error occurs, there isn't an obvious media type the client accepts to use in reporting structured error information | ||
** Con: X-headers are unwieldy if we need structured message attributes (YAGNI?) | ** Con: X-headers are unwieldy if we need structured message attributes (YAGNI?) | ||
+ | * Things that may allow the use for a wider variety of backends [/flameon] | ||
+ | ** For example, make paging through messages without claiming them optional | ||
+ | ** But if people just want Kafka or Qpid or whatever, why not just use those technologies directly? Once you put a REST API on top, it starts to look a lot like v1.x. For extremely high-throughput use cases, apps won't ever get what they want over python + REST. But, on the other hand, there are important use cases where REST is preferable, and if we continue to hold at ~20ms response times, that is still pretty darn good performance for going over the web. |
Revision as of 21:31, 2 September 2014
Marconi API v2.0
Brainstorming
- Remove getting one or more messages by ID
- Isn't terribly useful to users, and may (TBD) provide for performance optimizations in the drivers
- Migrate to topic-based semantics.
- Can post a single message to multiple topics in one request
- Can consumers read more than one topic in a single request?
- Delete a claim to delete all it's messages?
- Need to decide if we want to encourage deleting multiple messages at a time, or if that is an anti-pattern
- Only provide a message ID for claimed messages?
- Con: user may want to have an auditor that uses the feeds api, and the auditor will need to match up message IDs with the ones being claimed by the workers
- Support msgpack in addition to JSON?
- Main difficulty is in replying in JSON when a message was enqueued using msgpack, and includes one or more binary fields.
- Allow custom media types?
- Message attributes move into X-headers
- Allows for all kinds of binary types
- Con: if an error occurs, there isn't an obvious media type the client accepts to use in reporting structured error information
- Con: X-headers are unwieldy if we need structured message attributes (YAGNI?)
- Things that may allow the use for a wider variety of backends [/flameon]
- For example, make paging through messages without claiming them optional
- But if people just want Kafka or Qpid or whatever, why not just use those technologies directly? Once you put a REST API on top, it starts to look a lot like v1.x. For extremely high-throughput use cases, apps won't ever get what they want over python + REST. But, on the other hand, there are important use cases where REST is preferable, and if we continue to hold at ~20ms response times, that is still pretty darn good performance for going over the web.