The current model is there is a fixed number of itineraries. The available
endpoints could include multiple transports theoretically.
You're example where there are a variable number of itineraries depending
on protocol is not currently supported. In that case, I would suggest that
the list includes those as distinct datasets or you provide some kind of
criteria that states you want a preferred endpoint type if available when
listing the flights.
On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 6:19 AM ming zhang <ming.zhang.ch...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> but then the comment is not right? since not all flights will be consumed?
>
> "To consume the whole
> > > > * flight, all endpoints must be consumed."
>
> if we introduce a itinerary concept, we have a complete story and mental
> model. something like
>
> message FlightGetInfo {
> // schema of the dataset as described in Schema.fbs::Schema.
> bytes schema = 1;
>
> /*
> * The descriptor associated with this info.
> */
> FlightDescriptor flight_descriptor = 2;
>
> /*
> * A list of endpoints associated with the flight. To consume the whole
> * flight, all endpoints must be consumed.
> */
> repeated FlightItinerary itinerary = 3;
>
> // Set these to -1 if unknown.
> int64 total_records = 4;
> int64 total_bytes = 5;
> }
>
> message FlightItinerary {
> /*
> * A list of endpoints associated with the itinerary. To consume the
> whole
> * itinerary, all endpoints must be consumed.
> */
> repeated FlightEndpoint endpoint = 1;
> }
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 12:40 AM Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 10:08 PM ming zhang <ming.zhang.ch...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > in a case where there are multiple ways to retrieve this logical data
> > set,
> > > how to represent this in the response?
> > >
> > > for example, assume there is a data set that has
> > > part 1 in endpoint 1 and part 2 in endpoint 2 with tcp as transport
> > > both part 1 and part 2 in endpoint 3, with infiniband as transport
> > >
> > > now how we return this back to client so client decide which one to
> > consume?
> > >
> >
> > One way to do this would be to have the Ticket payload contain a
> > serialized object (e.g. a protocol buffer) which contains this
> > additional metadata for the client to decide which endpoints to
> > access.
> >
> > The Ticket returned in FlightEndpoint is opaque data so can contain
> > anything. In our performance test server the Ticket is a protobuf:
> >
> >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/arrow/blob/master/cpp/src/arrow/flight/perf-server.cc#L169
> >
> > > the mental model i have with FightService is similar to travel with
> > flight.
> > >
> > > - a travel agency lists many travel choices.
> > > - for a trip from NYC to SFO, there are different itinerary, like
> > NYC->SFO
> > > directly. NYC->Chicago -> SFO, and so on.
> > > - for each itinerary, there could be one or more logical parts (hop)
> > > - for each hop, there are different ways, like business class, economic
> > > class, etc
> > > - they all need a ticket to finish the trip.
> > >
> > > is this right, or way off?
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Ming
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 9:59 PM Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > A FlightGetInfo plan corresponds to a single logical dataset. The
> > > > dataset may be spread across multiple endpoints, so if you want the
> > > > whole dataset you have to execute DoGet against them all.
> > > >
> > > > I'm not sure what you mean by "provide more than one execution plan".
> > > >
> > > > - Wes
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 7:54 PM ming zhang <
> ming.zhang.ch...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi All
> > > > >
> > > > > Wonder how to understand this comment?
> > > > >
> > > > > Looks like this assume we only have one "itinerary" and finish it
> > need to
> > > > > consume all the flight endpoints.
> > > > >
> > > > > /*
> > > > > * A list of endpoints associated with the flight. To consume the
> > whole
> > > > > * flight, all endpoints must be consumed.
> > > > > */
> > > > >
> > > > > What if we do want to provide more than one execution plan
> > (itinerary)
> > > > and
> > > > > each have multiple steps?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks
> > > > > Ming
> > > >
> >
>
