[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-6236?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16152199#comment-16152199
]
Vladimir Ozerov commented on IGNITE-6236:
-----------------------------------------
[~ptupitsyn], my comments:
1) {{ClientRequest}} and {{ClientResponse}} - we do not need flags there
2) {{ClientResponse}} - how exceptions are processed at the moment? We need to
agree on how to pass them backwards (message? vendor code?)
3) I am not sure we need to have separate {{boolean}} and {{object}} responses.
This gives minimal performance gain at the cost of more complex protocol.
Remember that we want this protocol to be implemented by community.
4) Do we really need to implement metadata request/responses as a part of this
ticket? First, it should be possible to work with grid without metadata at all
(e.g. certain client might decide to not support it at all). Second, looks like
requests/responses require carefull design. I would prefer to do that outside
of cache operations.
5) Let's put different request types to different packages on Java side to have
more structured code (e.g. "cache", "binary", etc).
> .NET: Thin client: cache.Get and Put for user types
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: IGNITE-6236
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-6236
> Project: Ignite
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: platforms
> Reporter: Pavel Tupitsyn
> Assignee: Pavel Tupitsyn
> Labels: .NET
> Fix For: 2.3
>
>
> Cache operations on user types require proper metadata handling. Make sure
> dynamic type registration works.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
