In this situation then wen we have a AVDL protocol definition. The
documentation mentions Avro tools for generation.
But I need runtime protocol changes.
Can the generation of protocol classes be done automatically at runtime?
W dniu 30.09.2013 23:08, Doug Cutting pisze:
For RPC, specific is usually most convenient. The generated interface
and classes can be used to create requests and make calls, while a
service can implement the interface. Generic might be useful for
proxy-type RPC services, that can handle RPCs made in any protocol.
Doug
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 3:32 AM, michał <[email protected]> wrote:
Hello,
We have got two ways of creating an RPC communication protocol from AVDL.
Generic:
https://github.com/matteobertozzi/Hadoop/blob/master/avro-examples/java/ipc/HTServer.java
Specific:https://github.com/phunt/avro-rpc-quickstart/blob/master/src/main/java/example/Main.java
Specific provide a custom implementation (it require code generation based
on avdl) while generic provide 'generic' implementation. What this *generic*
actually means in terms of a protocol specification and code use?
1. What is the difference between the two apart from code look?
2. I can not understand what would be a good example code showing the
advantages of Specific vs Generic responder?
3. When would be the good choice to use *generic* and when *specific (code
generation?)* responder?
thank you in advance for your time replying.
Mick
