Great thanks! :) James
On 3/17/06, Mats Forslöf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Ok, thanks. Applied the patch on the C++ code. > > Regards, > Mats > > -----Original Message----- > From: James Strachan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: den 17 mars 2006 08:05 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: OpenWire tight/loose encoding > > BTW I made a slight change to OpenWire the other day, turning > Command.commandId into an int rather than a short (so that we can reuse it > as a reliability counter when using unreliable transports like > UDP/multicast) - I hope it does't cause too many problems in the C/C++ code. > I"ve patched the C# code but the C/C++ code still needs upgrading. > > James > > On 3/17/06, Hiram Chirino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Great! > > > > I can't wait to peek at the patch! > > > > Regards, > > Hiram > > > > On 3/16/06, Mats Forslöf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi Hiram > > > > > > Thanks for the update. We have already selected the loose encoding as > the default encoding in the C++ client, it's good to see that we have > selected the same. The tight encoding is deferred to a future release since > it is a bit more complicated and we wanted something up and running. We're > just finished a architectural re-design in the C++ client that makes a lot > less code to maintain and a bit easy to add other protocols (see previous > posts regarding C++ refactoring suggestion). > > > > > > Will get back soon with a new patch udpate including updated groovy > scripts. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Mats > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > > > Hiram Chirino > > > Sent: den 16 mars 2006 13:46 > > > To: [email protected] > > > Subject: Re: OpenWire tight/loose encoding > > > > > > Hi Mats! > > > > > > On 3/16/06, Mats Forslöf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > We need some additional information on the OpenWire protocol to wrap > up our work on the C++ AMQ client. > > > > > > > > 1. To use loose encoding what do we have to do, is it simply to set > the tight encoding attribute to false on the OpenWireFormat package and then > send each package attributes one after each other? > > > > > > > > > > OpenWire should always start up in loose encoding mode, in version 1 > of the protocol, with all options off by default. This ensures backward > compatibitlity since future clients will beforced to be backward compatible > to even start talking. The clients then exchange a WireFormatInfo which > contains information about the highest version of the protocol and requested > protocol options that should be turned on. After that exchange both sides > can upgrade the version and options to a set that is compatible between the > 2 ends. > > > > > > > 2. What determines the order of the attributes on each package? The > order now seems to be determined by the groovy scripts. > > > > > > They are in the order that they were defined in the orifinal Java > command classes. The groovy script just preserves the order. > > > > > > > > > > > 3. What about the order of the boolean flags used in tight encoding, > what does each position stand for? > > > > > > > > > > The bits in the BooleanStream are also serialized in the same order. > > > > > > > I must ask you of some documentation on this because we cannot > verify that our code is correct otherwise. > > > > > > > > > > Any time! I guess we need to update the C++ guy to support loose > encoding since that is now the minimum requirement. At least it's much > simpler to implement. Should I work on that or have you guys allready have > that covered? > > > > > > Regards, > > > Hiram > > > > > > > Please help! > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Mats Forslöf > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Regards, > > > Hiram > > > > > > > > > -- > > Regards, > > Hiram > > > > > -- > > James > ------- > http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/ > -- James ------- http://radio.weblogs.com/0112098/
