[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-110?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12625738#action_12625738
]
Johan Stuyts commented on THRIFT-110:
-------------------------------------
Why would a more compact protocol require changes to the IDL? Couldn't the
protocol itself decide if a more suitable representation can be written? Here
is an example for writing integer fields:
{code}
if (0 <= v and v < {limit that requires at least four bytes})
{
// Put code for vint on the stream
// Put vint-encoded value on the stream
}
else if ({some negative number} <= v && v <= {some positive number})
{
// Put code for zig-zag on the stream
// Put zig-zag-encoded value on the stream
}
else
{
// Put code for int on the stream
// Put value on the stream
}
{code}
The values defined in {{TType.java}} are the ones structures must use to
communicate with protocols, but there is no requirement for protocols to use
them internally.
> A more compact format
> ----------------------
>
> Key: THRIFT-110
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-110
> Project: Thrift
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Noble Paul
>
> Thrift is not very compact in writing out data as (say protobuf) . It does
> not have the concept of variable length integers and various other
> optimizations possible . In Solr we use a lot of such optimizations to make a
> very compact payload. Thrift has a lot common with that format.
> It is all done in a single class
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/lucene/solr/trunk/src/java/org/apache/solr/common/util/NamedListCodec.java?revision=685640&view=markup
> The other optimizations include writing type/value in same byte, very fast
> writes of Strings, externalizable strings etc
> We could use a thrift format for non-java clients and I would like to see it
> as compact as the current java version
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
