On 01/20/2012 05:37 PM, Shaun Williams wrote:
> I don't care so much about encryption and authorization and prefer not to 
> have the extra overhead.

With SASL's anonymous profile there's no significant overhead.

http://avro.apache.org/docs/current/sasl.html#anonymous

> One of my components is c++, so I need a c++ RPC implementation.  At this 
> point, though, if I were to build one, It's not clear to me which wire format 
> to implement.  The netty server format is the simplest, yet I'm worried that 
> it might be deprecated.

So you need something that's interoperable.  In Avro, interoperability
is defined through the specification.  Netty currently doesn't conform
to the specification and is not interoperable.  AVRO-625 is the place to
discuss proposals for a standard, interoperable way to handle
out-of-order responses that we can add to the specification.

I think long-term we should push Avro to support two wire formats:

  1. HTTP, since it's such a widely deployed server infrastructure.  But
HTTP does not naturally support out-of-order responses or callbacks, and
may not be the most efficient.

  2. Something Avro-specific that efficiently supports out-of-order
responses, one-way messages, callbacks and security.

Any more than this and we'll inhibit interoperability.  SASL lets us
efficiently add optional security.  My hope is that we can compatibly
and optionally also add out-of-order responses and callbacks.

Doug

Reply via email to