Hey,
Sorry for the delay - now that the enum values are power-of-two I
think this is fine for any hypothetical encoding for Flight. In
particular gRPC allows binary headers so if we wanted to directly send
a dummy schema that would be fine, or we could encode it as a
bitfield. (There is some limit
I would be mostly interested in feedback by David Li and other Flight
developers, otherwise it's fine to me.
Regards
Antoine.
Le 25/06/2020 à 05:12, Micah Kornfield a écrit :
> I've updated the PR. More feedback welcome, I'd like to start a vote by
> end-of-week if possible.
>
> On Wed, Jun
I've updated the PR. More feedback welcome, I'd like to start a vote by
end-of-week if possible.
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 12:48 PM Micah Kornfield
wrote:
> I agree flight might need to encode this data slightly differently for
> negotiation purposes. I will update the enum to use power of 2 val
I agree flight might need to encode this data slightly differently for
negotiation purposes. I will update the enum to use power of 2 values so
this isn't precluded, but I think for parsing in the schema, it is clearer
to model this as a list of enums.
Any other thoughts?
Thanks,
Micah
On Tue
I'm in favor of the list of enums myself -- it seems like it will be
easier to work with and less error prone in general. Storage space
with this should not be an issue.
On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 7:31 AM Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>
>
>
> Le 23/06/2020 à 06:02, Micah Kornfield a écrit :
> >>
> > A bit-
Le 23/06/2020 à 06:02, Micah Kornfield a écrit :
>>
> A bit-field could work, but it is a little easier to mess-up (e.g.
> endianness).
I don't think endianness can be an issue. A bitfield would have the
same representation as any "long" Flatbuffers field.
> I would lean towards a list of e
I think for Fllight, it'd be good to work out some negotiation that
can preserve compatibility with the existing protocol as well, e.g. by
taking advantage of headers. For some methods, like DoGet, the data
flow isn't bidirectional so negotiating via headers (or earlier in the
request flow, such as
>
> How would negotiation work? By exchanging a dummy Schema at the start?
That isn't specified here. I imagine there could be a new structure
defined specifically for flight that makes use of the enum.
> I put together a PR with a proposal on how to do this [1]. The PR adds a
> > new enum "Fe
Le 20/06/2020 à 22:33, Micah Kornfield a écrit :
> This can also potentially help standardize negotiations between
> clients and servers for flight.
How would negotiation work? By exchanging a dummy Schema at the start?
> I put together a PR with a proposal on how to do this [1]. The PR adds
