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
更有可能是400个坏请求
[* * 6.5.1。400错误请求**][1]
400(坏请求)状态代码表示服务器不能或 将不会处理请求由于某些东西被认为是 客户端错误(例如，格式错误的请求语法，无效的请求 消息框架，或欺骗性请求路由)。
由于请求包含重复的值(已经存在的值)，因此可以将其视为客户机错误。需要在下次尝试之前更改请求。 通过考虑这些事实，我们可以得出HTTP STATUS 400错误请求的结论。
其他回答
另一个潜在的治疗方法是使用PATCH。PATCH被定义为改变内部状态的东西，不局限于追加。
PATCH将通过允许您更新已经存在的项目来解决这个问题。参见:RFC 5789: PATCH
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.
更有可能是400个坏请求
[* * 6.5.1。400错误请求**][1]
400(坏请求)状态代码表示服务器不能或 将不会处理请求由于某些东西被认为是 客户端错误(例如，格式错误的请求语法，无效的请求 消息框架，或欺骗性请求路由)。
由于请求包含重复的值(已经存在的值)，因此可以将其视为客户机错误。需要在下次尝试之前更改请求。 通过考虑这些事实，我们可以得出HTTP STATUS 400错误请求的结论。
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).
就我个人而言，我倾向于WebDAV扩展422不可处理实体。
根据RFC 4918
422不可处理实体状态码意味着服务器理解请求实体的内容类型(因此415不支持的媒体类型状态码是不合适的)，并且请求实体的语法是正确的(因此400坏请求状态码是不合适的)，但无法处理包含的指令。
