Also, sample .thrift file showing the issue I have seen cases where there was some __isset confusion with complex types (long ago, don't remember the details)
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 3:16 AM, Jens Geyer <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Vitali, > > di you talk about Java? There is no component indicated at the ticket. > > Thanks Jens > ________________________________ > Von: Vitali Lovich (JIRA) > Gesendet: 17.04.2014 01:56 > An: [email protected] > Betreff: [jira] [Created] (THRIFT-2473) _isset entries shouldn't be > generated for non-optional fields > > Vitali Lovich created THRIFT-2473: > ------------------------------------- > > Summary: _isset entries shouldn't be generated for > non-optional fields > Key: THRIFT-2473 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-2473 > Project: Thrift > Issue Type: Bug > Reporter: Vitali Lovich > > > There's quite a bit of memory overhead (4 bytes per field) that's wasted > on every single type. The __isset field is unused by the thrift type for > fields not annotated optional. > > Additionally, it causes confusion in program code since people never know > whether or not the __isset struct can be checked for a particular field or > not (e.g. for non-optional fields it would never get set normally unless > you deserialized it). > > > > -- > This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA > (v6.2#6252) >
