[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-1942?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16445613#comment-16445613
]
stephen mallette commented on TINKERPOP-1942:
---------------------------------------------
Note that I'd made a few notes on IO for TinkerPop 4.x:
https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/blob/master/docs/src/dev/future/index.asciidoc#serialization
When we tried to get IO "right" for TinkerPop 3 we started by describing the
use cases we wanted to cover. I think that helped a lot with getting the right
choices made - until GLVs showed up and blew everything to pieces. That said, I
think it was worth considering and would like to think that way again. If you
look at the use cases for each of the IO existing formats (see the start of
each format's section -
http://tinkerpop.apache.org/docs/current/reference/#_gremlin_i_o) , where do
you see this one fitting? Given how you wrote the first sentences of that
document, it seems like you're thinking that this is more of a network format,
no?
> Binary serialization format
> ---------------------------
>
> Key: TINKERPOP-1942
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-1942
> Project: TinkerPop
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: io
> Reporter: Jorge Bay
> Priority: Major
>
> We should provide a binary serialization format designed to reduce
> serialization overhead and minimizing the size of the payload that is
> transmitted over the wire.
> It could be implemented in a very similar way as Kryo support but with
> interoperability in mind and ultimately we could fade Gryo out, as now with
> the GLVs it doesn't have a role to play.
> The main benefit would be the performance improvement, making serialization
> and deserialization processing time negligible on both the server and the
> client.
> Background:
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/13e70235591853801bab16ed457ee4f56f3dfe2d1c5817c34a036408@%3Cdev.tinkerpop.apache.org%3E
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
