On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 8:54 AM, john malkovich <cktg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> thats great! :) > I had a feeling something was up, that twitter digg hackathon post where > someone was hoping that it an erlang port was started? > either way pls put it up. Im no expert and the 1.2 spec is still a bit > unclear to me but I definitelly got more than a few things understood so > hopefully I'll be able to pitch in work wise > > Hi John, My branch is up here: http://github.com/toddlipcon/avro/tree/erl It's nowhere near complete, woefully undercommented, and has at least one big refactor before it's a good design :) But, then again, isn't that true of most software projects? ;-) But, it may at least get you started! -Todd > thanks > > On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 8:47 AM, Todd Lipcon <t...@cloudera.com> wrote: > > > Hi John, > > > > Before you go too far with Erlang -- I have an implementation that's > maybe > > half done that I started at the recent hackathon. I'll try to push this > to > > a > > public repository so you can continue from there rather than starting > fresh > > if you like. > > > > Thanks > > -Todd > > > > On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 1:11 AM, john malkovich <cktg...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > hello everyone, > > > thank you for such a wonderful project. > > > ufortunately there is no erlang implementation of avro so I have taken > > the > > > liberty to attempt such a task. as soon as I get something working I'll > > put > > > up the code, and if someone else is working on the same thing please > let > > me > > > know - Im more than open to collaboration since my goal is to get and > use > > a > > > working erlang avro lib. > > > Im reading the python implementation in details, as well as the 1.3 > > > specification. the spec unfortunately is not clear (to me) in some > parts > > so > > > I would like to ask the questions here and hopefully someone can > provide > > > some clues/answers. > > > > > > handshake request > > > its mentioned that a hash of the json protocol schema is sent on each > > > request to the server > > > > > > { > > > "type": "record", > > > "name": "HandshakeRequest", "namespace":"org.apache.avro.ipc", > > > "fields": [ > > > {"name": "clientHash", > > > "type": {"type": "fixed", "name": "MD5", "size": 16}}, > > > {"name": "clientProtocol", "type": ["null", "string"]}, > > > {"name": "serverHash", "type": "MD5"}, > > > {"name": "meta", "type": ["null", {"type": "map", "values": > "bytes"}]} > > > ] > > > } > > > > > > so the question is: > > > - both "clientHash" and "serverHash" should be replaced with the > > > actual hash of the protocol json definitions? > > > - what is the "server protocol"? if client and server are compatible > > > dont they both use the same protocol definition? > > > - the "type": ["null", "string"] syntax means that "type" key has > > > either "null" or "string" value? > > > > > >
