Dmitry, Iv checked and its actually work But a specially in this branch i found another bug Please look at my last comment: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-10358?focusedCommentId=16697285&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-16697285
пт, 23 нояб. 2018 г. в 01:21, Dmitry Melnichuk < dmitry.melnic...@nobitlost.com>: > Stepan, > > Thank you for your great job in evaluating Python thin client, as well > as other thin clients. > > There was indeed a bug in Python client regarding the handling of type > hints in Collection type. I created a fix and did a PR under > IGNITE-10358 task, but the same PR is also fixes the problem in > IGNITE-10230 task. > > As of handling the type mapping in gists you provided, I left comments > on both tasks. > > Dmitry > > On 11/21/18 6:37 PM, Stepan Pilschikov wrote: > > Dmitry, Alexey > > > > Thank you for help, this answers help me a lot with understanding how > > clients are work > > > > Not so long time ago i met problem which is have expected behavior, but > its > > may broke some workflows in future for some users > > > > Its all about not specified data types in collections and map's > > All description and examples in > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-10358 > > > > Dmitry, can you have a quick look at it and maybe in future somehow fix > it? > > > > пт, 26 окт. 2018 г. в 19:05, Dmitry Melnichuk < > > dmitry.melnic...@nobitlost.com>: > > > >> Stepan! > >> > >> TL/DR: what you got with Python client in your gist is an intended > >> behavior. > >> > >> Explanation: As per docs, Object array contains of type ID (which is > >> defaults to -1) and an array of objects. > >> > >> > >> > https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/binary-client-protocol-data-format#section-object-array > >> > >> Your gist might be fixed accordingly: > >> > >> ``` > >> from pyignite import Client > >> from pyignite.datatypes import * > >> > >> OBJECT_ARRAY_TYPE_ID = -1 > >> OBJECT_ARRAY_CONTENTS = [1, 2] > >> > >> client = Client() > >> client.connect('127.0.0.1', 10800) > >> cache = client.get_or_create_cache("PY_OBJECT_ARRAY") > >> cache.put( > >> 1, > >> (OBJECT_ARRAY_TYPE_ID, OBJECT_ARRAY_CONTENTS), > >> key_hint=IntObject, > >> value_hint=ObjectArrayObject, > >> ) > >> > >> # Python output: print(cache.get(1)) > >> # (-1, [1, 2]) > >> ``` > >> > >> The situation is similar with Map and Collection, they have types. Types > >> and type IDs are mostly useless in Python, but I left them for > >> interoperability reasons. If you think I should kick them out, just let > >> me know. > >> > >> The usage of these 3 data types is documented and tested. You can refer > >> to the table in “Data types” section: > >> > >> > >> > https://apache-ignite-binary-protocol-client.readthedocs.io/en/latest/datatypes/parsers.html > >> > >> The tests are here: > >> > >> > >> > https://github.com/apache/ignite/blob/master/modules/platforms/python/tests/test_datatypes.py#L116-L124 > >> > >> On 10/26/18 11:57 PM, Stepan Pilschikov wrote: > >>> Hi, everyone > >>> > >>> Create new thread to centralize cross compatibility and others common > >>> problems between thin clients > >>> > >>> Tying to use Object array to exchange different data between JS, PHP > and > >>> Python thin clients > >>> > >>> JS and PHP simply can't put any type of arrays > >>> Python can put data, but if you take it, data would be completely > >>> different, maybe during this put process data is changed > >>> > >>> Code and output: > >>> PHP - > >> https://gist.github.com/pilshchikov/e887d31d4f2f36923470fead14c7801a > >>> JS - > >> https://gist.github.com/pilshchikov/ba49067fd8924ebdf4414ec63838b86d > >>> Python - > >>> https://gist.github.com/pilshchikov/f4bbf76e31547e2dca7d4cc5d55bd24f > >>> > >>> I'm tried different data types (string, double, float, complex objects, > >>> just random objects, char, byte, Date), still > >>> > >>> How, from my perspective, it should works: > >>> put array of any type and then get this array. > >>> Example: put [1,2,3] -> get [1,2,3] or put [new Date(), new Date()] -> > >>> get [[Date object], [Date object]] (like in java thin client) > >>> > >>> Looks like bug in all clients, what you think? > >>> > >>> I wanted to try Collections, but i think this type have same problem > >> > > > >
