Hi
I have a collection of message types which all share a common set of
fields. Each message type has an additional number of attributes particular
to that message type. Two choices I am considering on how to structure our
schemas
Option A - import and compose
========================
common.proto
syntax = "proto3";
message Common
{
string fruit = 1;
string vegetable = 2;
}
messageA.proto
syntax = "proto3";
import "common.proto";
message messageA
{
Common shared = 1;
string cereal = 2;
}
Option B - Use Any in the common part
============================
common.proto
syntax = "proto3";
message Common
{
string fruit = 1;
string vegetable = 2;
Any messageX = 3;
}
messageA.proto
syntax = "proto3";
import "common.proto";
message messageA
{
string cereal = 2;
}
Any advice or opinions on which choice is preferable? Would the Any route
require an extra deserializing step that the composition route does not and
be less efficient? It seems that after deserializing in the client, we
still have to pull the any field, check the type and then additionally
unpack it. Would the Any route require me to compile twice and generate two
separate sets of files for each client - one for the Common.proto and one
for the messageX.proto? Option A would require just a compile against
messageX.proto.
Cheers
Mike
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Protocol Buffers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
