Jake thanks for bringing this up. Could have been a big waste of effort if you hadnt.
-- Mike Stolz Principal Engineer - Gemfire Product Manager Mobile: 631-835-4771 On Nov 30, 2018 8:51 AM, "Jacob Barrett" <jbarr...@pivotal.io> wrote: > Devs, > > Please be careful with how you are serializing internal classes between > servers and clients. While you may think you are safe if you simply use > DataSerializable you are wrong, very very wrong. If you define your > internal class as DataSerializable then when serialized the fully qualified > class name is serialized ahead of it to identify the class being > serialized. This happens because there is no Instantiator for your internal > class, so it can’t use a number and falls back to the class name. If you > rename or move the class later you will run into backwards compatibility > issues that have to be resolved by transforming the string name back and > forth to the new name. > > DataSerializable should be reserved only for user defined classes. Please > use DataSerializableFixedID for internal classes. This method uses a fixed > integer to identify your class. Not only is it more efficient it also > avoids issues with class or package renaming. > > Thanks, > Jake > >
