[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BOOKKEEPER-587?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13609189#comment-13609189
]
Aniruddha commented on BOOKKEEPER-587:
--------------------------------------
WRT BOOKKEEPER-558, the server handles both protocols while the client is
updated to use only the new one in our patch. The protobuf changes were mainly
a precursor to support range-reads, so there isn't a big refactor in the way
messages are handled. I'm not exactly certain how useful full backward
compatibility is and whether it's worth adding complexity to the code. So long
as we update the clients before the servers, making the servers backward
compatible should be sufficient. Same goes for keeping the data out of
protobufs (this will make range reads and batch writes complicated. If we want
to do a zero-copy transfer, it should be possible even while using protobufs.)
Another thing we've done is add transaction ids. Thoughts?
> Make BK use protobufs on the wire
> ---------------------------------
>
> Key: BOOKKEEPER-587
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BOOKKEEPER-587
> Project: Bookkeeper
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Reporter: Ivan Kelly
> Assignee: Ivan Kelly
> Fix For: 4.3.0
>
> Attachments:
> 0003-BOOKKEEPER-587-Make-BK-use-protobufs-on-the-wire.-Bu.patch
>
>
> Building on BOOKKEEPER-582, make bookkeeper use protobufs for on wire
> transmission.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
