I've tried changing the default of the field to -1.
Without rebuilding the Messages, re-reading them with the new
definitions simply gives me the following:
has_uploadlimit = false; uploadlimit= -1.
Since this is the case, I assume that the field in the Message itself
isn't initialized, and that
Hi all,
Just thought you'd like to know I am writing a series of articles on
Drizzle's replication system, and much of the first article is all
about GPB.
http://www.jpipes.com/index.php?/archives/298-Drizzle-Replication-The-Command-Message.html
Thanks for a great library and toolset! You
Which C# implementation are you using? I'm not personally familiar with any
of them so this is just out of curiosity.
For future reference, another thing that might have helped in debugging
would be to use protoc's --decode flag to see what the message actually
contained:
protoc
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 8:15 PM, Yingfeng yingfeng.zh...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
As is known to lots of people, std::string performs not good for such
reasons as copy-on-write,... etc.
Note that the C++ protobuf implementation generally assumes that string
copies are expensive and avoids them
Hi,
This might be a how long is a piece of string-type question, but I
was wondering if there's any way for me to know how much protocol
buffers might add to my app's memory footprint, when I have a large
number of messages. I see there's a LITE option which sounds like the
mode I would need to
Well there's good news and bad news. The bad news is that using protocol
buffers has been known to lead to large code footprints. The good news is
that it should be fairly easy to estimate how much it will bloat *your*
binary, without having to actually implement the whole system.
Protocol
We have a UI app (client) that talks to a locally running process
(localhost) which I am calling the server. So, we're using SOAP for
IPC so it's not remote, but it is an invocation of an out-of-process
functionality. As such both processes are running on the client
machine. We have a number of
Ah, I was just talking about the size of the .jar files here, which I had
thought was what you were worried about. The runtime memory use could be
much larger; I'm not sure. In the non-lite runtime, descriptors are
constructed at startup which take space. The lite library does not allocate
any
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 3:27 PM, Noel Fegan nfe...@gmail.com wrote:
You don't happen to have a WSDL to proto file converter by any
chance? ;-)
No, but I bet you could write an XSLT to do it pretty easily.
On Aug 12, 10:56 pm, Kenton Varda ken...@google.com wrote:
Well there's good news
