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 Protocol documentation
Date Mon, 27 Nov 2017 11:46:47 GMT
Sergey,

1. Code table size does not affect anything, as I understand, so there is
no reason to introduce an extra byte.
2. We have object arrays (code 23), I forgot to mention them, fixed.
3. Also forgot, see code 25 in the updated document.

Also note that operation codes have been updated (grouped by purpose) as
part of https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-6989.

Thanks,
Pavel

On Sun, Nov 26, 2017 at 9:54 PM, Sergey Kozlov <skozlov@gridgain.com> wrote:

> Pavel
>
> Thanks for the document and your efforts for new protocol. It was really
> helpful for playing around the python thin client design.
>
> Could you explain some things that were still not clear for binary object
> format:
>
> 1. What a reason to introduce separated type codes for arrays? Why just we
> can't use the following?
> *<1 byte universal array code>*
> *<1 byte primitive code>*
> *<4 bytes length>*
> *<N bytes data>*
>
> We get 1 byte overhead but save 10 bytes in the code table. For arrays the
> overhead is really insignificant:10 longs array takes now 1+4+4*10=45 bytes
> vs 1+1+4+4*10=46 bytes for the approach
> Moreover for that appoach a new primitive code will be available for using
> for array immediately.
>
> 2. Why the arrays force to use a selected type? For python there's no
> limitations to use different types across one array (list). Would be good
> to introduce a new type that will allow that. It could be look like
> following
> *<1 byte universal array code>*
> *<1 byte no common type code*> <-- this says that every item must provide
> its date type code like it does regular primitive data
> *<4 bytes length>*
> *<1 byte item 0 type code>*     <-- item provides its code
> *<N byte item 0 data>*      <-- item provides its data
> *<1 byte item 1 type code>*
> *<N byte item 1 data>*
> etc
>
> Also that allow to put nested arrays without changes in type code table!
> For instance if we want to store 9 longs and 1 boolean it will take
> now 1+1+4+(1+9)*4+(1+1)=48
> bytes (vs 45 bytes to store as 10 longs as usual).
>
> 3. Ther's only one way to store a dictionary (key-value) structure as value
> in the cache via Complex Object. But it looks like overcomplicated. I
> suppose to introduce a code for that
> *<1 byte key-value dictionary code>*
>
> *<4 bytes length>*
> *<1 byte key 1 **name **type code>*
> *<N byte key 1 name data>*
> *<1 byte value 1 type code>*
> *<N byte value 1 value>*
> *<1 byte key 2 **name **type code>*
> *<N byte key 2 name data>*
> *<1 byte value 2 type code>*
> *<N byte value 2 value>*
> etc
>
> Also that allow to put nested dictionaries without changes in type code
> table!
> Of  course for the appoach above we get significat overhead for key
> storing. But I think it is acceptable for some cases and definitely ok for
> Python
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 9:14 PM, Prachi Garg <pgarg@gridgain.com> wrote:
>
> > Thanks Pavel! The document has good information. I'll create one on
> > readme.io; will also add some examples there.
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 5:03 AM, Pavel Tupitsyn <ptupitsyn@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Igniters,
> > >
> > > I've put together a detailed description of our Thin Client protocol
> > > in form of IEP on wiki:
> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-
> > > 9+Thin+Client+Protocol
> > >
> > >
> > > To clarify:
> > > - Protocol implementation is in master (see ClientMessageParser class)
> > > - Protocol has not been released yet, so we are free to change anything
> > > - Protocol is only used by .NET Thin Client for now, but is supposed to
> > be
> > > used from other languages by third party contributors
> > > - More operations will be added in future, this is a first set of them,
> > > cache-related
> > >
> > >
> > > Please review the document and let me know your thoughts.
> > > Is there anything missing or wrong?
> > >
> > > We should make sure that the foundation is solid and extensible.
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Pavel
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Sergey Kozlov
> GridGain Systems
> www.gridgain.com
>

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