ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pavel Tupitsyn <ptupit...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Thin client and binary metadata
Date Tue, 05 Sep 2017 10:39:22 GMT
Ok, I think we all agree on that.
Client implementors can decide whether they call metadata API or not.

Now onto the API itself: I've outlined the proposal in JIRA [1].
Let me know your thoughts.

[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-6258

On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 5:06 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrakyan@apache.org>
wrote:

> I think we should support and clearly document both modes, with and without
> metadata.
>
> On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 2:06 AM, Pavel Tupitsyn <ptupitsyn@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > In my understanding such objects are completely fine.
> >
> > Even typeId is not necessary, since we have
> > GridBinaryMarshaller.UNREGISTERED_TYPE_ID mode,
> > where full type name is included in binary object header.
> >
> > My testing shows that Ignite works fine with such objects (including
> SQL).
> >
> > Pavel
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 10:40 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <vozerov@gridgain.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Igniters,
> > >
> > > As you probably know, we are working on a new protocol for thin client.
> > It
> > > would allow users to create integrations with other languages and
> > platforms
> > > (e.g. Go, R, etc). This protocol should be simple enough, otherwise
> > no-one
> > > would ever implement anything on top of it.
> > >
> > > There is a problem with binary object metadata. Currently when we
> > serialize
> > > objects we check if any new metadata is available, and if yes - we push
> > it
> > > to the cluster before serialization is finished. This way we always
> have
> > > metadata for all objects in the cluster. Metadata allow us to implement
> > > certain features - introspection (usability) and performance (so called
> > > "compact footer" optimization). Bad thing is that metadata management
> > would
> > > make client implementation much more complex.
> > >
> > > I feel that in some cases clients might decide not to implement
> metadata
> > > management for the sake of simplicity. Technically this is very easy -
> > just
> > > disable "compactFooter" optimization and write field IDs during
> > > serialization. But I remember that there were some ideas to deprecate
> > > "compactFooter=false" at all.
> > >
> > > My question is: are fine with idea that objects without metadata will
> be
> > > normal case in Ignite?
> > >
> > > Vladimir.
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message