On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 1:19 PM Udo Kohlmeyer wrote:
> How to multiplex
> the different major version messages is still up for design and
> implementation though.
>
>
Than I think to Dan's question the correlation ID should go away now until
a design is determined. Adding it because we had it befo
On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 12:37 PM Michael William Dodge
wrote:
> From my days using Win32 APIs, I think fixing Foo() with FooEx() is an
> anti-pattern. But that's not to say that "version 37 fixes the parameters
> to Foo() and in no other way changes anything" is any better. I see the
> version as
+1 to what Jake said. Our approach is exactly what your preference is. The
adding of messages would new operations and variations on the operation.
PUT will be different to PUT_WITH_CALLBACK. Even in the backend the
processing of the messages will be handled by a different
operationsHandlers.
With
From my days using Win32 APIs, I think fixing Foo() with FooEx() is an
anti-pattern. But that's not to say that "version 37 fixes the parameters to
Foo() and in no other way changes anything" is any better. I see the version as
useful for determining the structure of the protocol, not the specif
+1
On Monday, October 2, 2017, 11:14:55 AM PDT, Jacob Barrett
wrote:
A change to a message should just be a new message, no need to version it.
Clients and severs could negotiate the messages they support or attempt the
message they support and fallback to an alternative if the server r
A change to a message should just be a new message, no need to version it.
Clients and severs could negotiate the messages they support or attempt the
message they support and fallback to an alternative if the server rejects
it. Consider Put and PutEx (ignore the names):
Put ( Key, Value )
PutEx (K
We should check that it is actually safe to add fields.
If it isn't we're likely to have a lot of versioning to do.
--
Mike Stolz
Principal Engineer, GemFire Product Lead
Mobile: +1-631-835-4771
On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 5:25 PM, Galen O'Sullivan
wrote:
> Replies inline.
>
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017
Replies inline.
On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 12:13 PM, Udo Kohlmeyer
wrote:
> Replies inline
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Dan Smith wrote:
>
> > This actually brings up another point I was going to ask about. I don't
> see
> > any version information in the protocol. How will we handle adding
Replies inline
On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Dan Smith wrote:
> Replies inline.
>
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 10:54 AM, Brian Baynes wrote:
>
> > Thanks for your thoughts, Dan. Some additional info, taking your items #
> > by #:
> >
> > 1) correlationID was put in with the thought that we cou
Replies inline.
On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 10:54 AM, Brian Baynes wrote:
> Thanks for your thoughts, Dan. Some additional info, taking your items #
> by #:
>
> 1) correlationID was put in with the thought that we could support
> out-of-order messages in a future version. You have any input on tha
Thanks for your thoughts, Dan. Some additional info, taking your items #
by #:
1) correlationID was put in with the thought that we could support
out-of-order messages in a future version. You have any input on that plan?
2) Create/destroy region will be added after GA v1.0, so these messages
s
I'm curious about few things I see in the .proto files.
1) I see there is a correlationId in the MessageHeader definition. What is
that used for? I remember we had a discussion a while back where I thought
we had decided that might not be not necessary?
2) I also see a CreateRegionRequest and Des
You can find them in the code, but we'll be providing better documentation
on the messages shortly. The proto files have the message definitions and
they're pretty straightforward, but we'll have a more user-friendly
write-up soon.
On Sep 15, 2017 5:27 PM, "Dan Smith" wrote:
What's the best pla
What's the best place to look for more details on the specific protocol for
the v1.0 messages? The other pages on https://cwiki.apache.org/
confluence/display/GEODE/New+Client+Server+Protocol? Or directly in the
code somewhere?
-Dan
On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 11:15 AM, Brian Baynes wrote:
> Greeti
Greetings, friends of Geode.
Work has been progressing on the new client/server protocol for Geode and
we're approaching a GA v1.0. Completed work/features include put/get,
putAll, getAll, remove, one-way SSL, authentication and authorization, and
support for primitive types and JSON documents as
15 matches
Mail list logo
