Re: Protobuf long number JSON serialisation

[Joseph Wu]

This is not necessarily a bug, but I think we can safely extend our parsing
code to handle this case.

This is the method that would need to change:
https://github.com/apache/mesos/blob/e859d3ae8d8ff7349327b9e6a89edd6f98d2b7a1/3rdparty/stout/include/stout/protobuf.hpp#L433-L435

On Thu, Aug 4, 2016 at 4:04 PM, Anand Mazumdar  wrote:

> Tomek,
>
> Thanks for reporting this. Looks like a bug in our JSON -> Protobuf
> parsing code. Mind filing a JIRA issue?
>
> -anand
>
>
> > On Aug 4, 2016, at 2:04 PM, Tomek Janiszewski  wrote:
> >
> > Hi
> >
> > I have a problem with HTTP API. Proto2 does not specify JSON mappings but
> > Proto3 does and it recommend to map 64bit numbers as a string.
> > Unfortunately Mesos does not accepts strings in places of uint64 and
> return
> > 400 Bad Request error Failed to convert JSON into Call protobuf: Not
> > expecting a JSON string for field 'value'.
> > Is this by purpose or is this a bug?
> >
> > Best
> > Tomek
>
>

Re: Protobuf long number JSON serialisation

[Anand Mazumdar]

Tomek,

Thanks for reporting this. Looks like a bug in our JSON -> Protobuf parsing 
code. Mind filing a JIRA issue?

-anand
 

> On Aug 4, 2016, at 2:04 PM, Tomek Janiszewski  wrote:
> 
> Hi
> 
> I have a problem with HTTP API. Proto2 does not specify JSON mappings but
> Proto3 does and it recommend to map 64bit numbers as a string.
> Unfortunately Mesos does not accepts strings in places of uint64 and return
> 400 Bad Request error Failed to convert JSON into Call protobuf: Not
> expecting a JSON string for field 'value'.
> Is this by purpose or is this a bug?
> 
> Best
> Tomek

Protobuf long number JSON serialisation

[Tomek Janiszewski]

Hi

I have a problem with HTTP API. Proto2 does not specify JSON mappings but
Proto3 does and it recommend to map 64bit numbers as a string.
Unfortunately Mesos does not accepts strings in places of uint64 and return
400 Bad Request error Failed to convert JSON into Call protobuf: Not
expecting a JSON string for field 'value'.
Is this by purpose or is this a bug?

Best
Tomek