我正在构建一个允许客户端存储对象的服务器。这些对象是在客户端完全构造的，对象id在对象的整个生命周期内都是永久的。
我已经定义了API，以便客户端可以使用PUT创建或修改对象:
PUT /objects/{id} HTTP/1.1
...
{json representation of the object}
{id}是对象id，所以它是Request-URI的一部分。
现在，我也在考虑允许客户端使用POST创建对象:
POST /objects/ HTTP/1.1
...
{json representation of the object, including ID}
由于POST意味着“追加”操作，我不确定在对象已经存在的情况下该做什么。我应该把请求作为修改请求，还是应该返回一些错误代码(哪个)?
当前回答
在检查重复记录的正确代码时偶然发现了这个问题。
请原谅我的无知，但我不明白为什么每个人都忽略了代码“300”，它清楚地表示“多项选择”或“模棱两可”
在我看来，这将是构建非标准或特定系统供自己使用的完美代码。我也可能是错的!
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7231#section-6.4.1
其他回答
我的感觉是409冲突是最合适的，但是，在野外当然很少见到:
The request could not be completed due to a conflict with the current state of the resource. This code is only allowed in situations where it is expected that the user might be able to resolve the conflict and resubmit the request. The response body SHOULD include enough information for the user to recognize the source of the conflict. Ideally, the response entity would include enough information for the user or user agent to fix the problem; however, that might not be possible and is not required. Conflicts are most likely to occur in response to a PUT request. For example, if versioning were being used and the entity being PUT included changes to a resource which conflict with those made by an earlier (third-party) request, the server might use the 409 response to indicate that it can't complete the request. In this case, the response entity would likely contain a list of the differences between the two versions in a format defined by the response Content-Type.
由于您提到使用post的对象创建请求包含对象的ID，因此应该使其成为幂等请求。只返回与成功创建请求完全相同的响应。幂等请求使api更简单，例如。现在客户不必担心两种不同的情况(成功，失败)。或者客户端可以安全地重试请求，以防在连接/服务器暂时宕机时出现问题。
用户侧故障，属于4xx组。这是正确答案https://developers.rebrandly.com/docs/403-already-exists-errors
根据RFC 7231，如果POST处理的结果等同于 现有资源的表示。
I think for REST, you just have to make a decision on the behavior for that particular system in which case, I think the "right" answer would be one of a couple answers given here. If you want the request to stop and behave as if the client made a mistake that it needs to fix before continuing, then use 409. If the conflict really isn't that important and want to keep the request going, then respond by redirecting the client to the entity that was found. I think proper REST APIs should be redirecting (or at least providing the location header) to the GET endpoint for that resource following a POST anyway, so this behavior would give a consistent experience.
EDIT: It's also worth noting that you should consider a PUT since you're providing the ID. Then the behavior is simple: "I don't care what's there right now, put this thing there." Meaning, if nothing is there, it'll be created; if something is there it'll be replaced. I think a POST is more appropriate when the server manages that ID. Separating the two concepts basically tells you how to deal with it (i.e. PUT is idempotent so it should always work so long as the payload validates, POST always creates, so if there is a collision of IDs, then a 409 would describe that conflict).
