[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-110?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12665729#action_12665729
]
Bryan Duxbury commented on THRIFT-110:
--------------------------------------
I'm not convinced that it makes sense to try and account for future types now.
We have all the primitives and containers. The only thing I could imagine
adding is unsigned ints, maybe. I'd rather cross that bridge when we get to it
anyway.
I haven't put together a test that compares compression with binary protocol
versus compact protocol. Our dataset compressed something like 8:1 with binary
protocol, and it's probably less than that with the compact protocol. I don't
think I'll bother to do the comparison until after I've tried out the
delta-based approach, though.
> A more compact format
> ----------------------
>
> Key: THRIFT-110
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/THRIFT-110
> Project: Thrift
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Noble Paul
> Attachments: compact-proto-spec-2.txt, compact_proto_spec.txt,
> compact_proto_spec.txt, thrift-110-v2.patch, thrift-110-v3.patch,
> thrift-110-v4.patch, thrift-110-v5.patch, thrift-110.patch
>
>
> 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.
