arger than that, it will fail to parse. This can be
>> > configured if you really need to parse larger messages, but it is
>> > generally
>> > not recommended. Additionally, ByteSize() returns a 32-bit integer, so
>> > there's an implicit li
fers
> -
> > if a message is larger than that, it will fail to parse. This can be
> > configured if you really need to parse larger messages, but it is
> generally
> > not recommended. Additionally, ByteSize() returns a 32-bit integer, so
> > there's an
implicit limit on the size of data that can be serialized.
>
> You can certainly use protocol buffers in large data sets, but it's not
> recommended to have your entire data set be represented by a single message.
> Instead, see if you can break it up into smaller messages.
>
>
x27;s an implicit limit on the size of data that can be serialized.
You can certainly use protocol buffers in large data sets, but it's not
recommended to have your entire data set be represented by a single message.
Instead, see if you can break it up into smaller messages.
On Mon, May 17,
I wanted to get some opinion on large data sets and protocol buffers.
Protocol Buffer project page by google says that for data > 1
megabytes, one should consider something different but they don’t
mention what would happen if one crosses this limit. Are there any
known failure modes when it co
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 9:34 AM, Brenden Matthews wrote:
> it specifies that "if you are dealing in messages larger than a
> megabyte each, it may be time to consider an alternate strategy".
>
> My question is: does this apply to messages which are large because
> they themselves contain many (i.e.
Hi,
In the documentation here:
http://code.google.com/apis/protocolbuffers/docs/techniques.html#large-data
it specifies that "if you are dealing in messages larger than a
megabyte each, it may be time to consider an alternate strategy".
My question is: does this apply to messages which are lar
