Same, This is an easy change on the driver end and makes more sense as well.
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 7:37 AM, Stephen Mallette <[email protected]> wrote: > It occurred to me that the Gremlin Server protocol hasn't changed in any > way in months. A good thing, perhaps, but it also worried me a little, in > that on the other hand the reason it may not have changed is because it > hasn't been paid enough attention. In giving it another review, I found > that I was quickly reminded of an annoying element of it - the "message > terminator". > > Since Gremlin Server streams results back, the protocol need a way to > express that the stream was "done". I'd implemented this as a terminating > message with a status code 299. This approach had the effect of marking > the stream as "done" but came with the expense of an extra message for > every request. If I had n requests which generated a stream of s response > messages, i'd construct (n * 2) + s response messages to get all n requests > met. I must have grown smarter in the last few months because it only took > a few keystrokes to alter the code to get rid of the terminator leaving us > with n + s response messages which is an obvious improvement. > > To accomplish this, I introduced these changes: > > 1. Dropped status code 299 > 2. Added status codes 204 (NO_CONTENT) and 206 (PARTIAL_CONTENT) > 3. On a successful request with streaming results, the server will return > 206 to represent that there are more results to be returned in the stream. > Those results will continue until 200 (SUCCESS) is returned. A successful > result with no streaming (e.g. 1 result in an iterator) will just return a > 200. > 4. All other status codes outside of 206, including the new 204 (which is > returned for things like an empty iterator) represent terminating > conditions for the stream. > > I have this work in a branch at the moment, but would like to move it to > master in time for M9. As this was a breaking change for the various > clients out there (gremlin-js, aiogremlin, etc), I thought I'd post here > first for comments before introducing it. > > Thanks, > > Stephen >
