Protobuf3 support protobuf2 syntax.
- Sijie
On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 12:27 PM Ming Luo
wrote:
> Hi Sijie,
>
> I just want to clarify if it is to upgrade protobuf 2 to 3. Would that lead
> to a backward compatibility issue for clients? Proto3 has removed the
> custom default, which pulsar api pro
Hi Sijie,
I just want to clarify if it is to upgrade protobuf 2 to 3. Would that lead
to a backward compatibility issue for clients? Proto3 has removed the
custom default, which pulsar api proto uses, and a few others in proto 2.
Would that be a concern for clients?
Ming
On Fri, 22 May 2020 at 1
> On May 22, 2020, at 10:52 AM, Sijie Guo wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I would like to kick off a discussion about what we should do for protobuf
> 2.4.1 and figure out what is the long term plan.
>
> Currently, Pulsar is using a customized version of protobuf 2.4.1 for wire
> protocol. The custom
Hi all,
I would like to kick off a discussion about what we should do for protobuf
2.4.1 and figure out what is the long term plan.
Currently, Pulsar is using a customized version of protobuf 2.4.1 for wire
protocol. The customization was made to leverage netty object pooling to
reduce object gen
