In the case of repeated strings etc (excluding the "enum" case), I've been toying whether something is possible by associating certain objects / values with unique identifiers on the wire. Potentially this would also allow "graph" (rather than "tree") serialization.
This is obviously well into the hazy area of "outside what protobuf offers, but possible to represent as valid protobuf fragments / messages", but I'd be interested in people's thoughts... worth investigating? Or silly? Marc On 27 April 2010 22:33, Kenton Varda <ken...@google.com> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 12:38 PM, sheila miguez <she...@pobox.com> wrote: > >> I wasn't expecting a good compression >> ratio for protobuf messages since they are decently packed already, >> but was happy to see that result. >> > > Yep, Protobufs are a compact encoding, but compression can still work well > depending on your data set. For example, if you load your message > with compressible strings or other repetitive data, the protobuf encoding > itself is not going to actually compress them, so adding zlib on top will > help. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Protocol Buffers" group. > To post to this group, send email to proto...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<protobuf%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en. > -- Regards, Marc -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Protocol Buffers" group. To post to this group, send email to proto...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en.
