Re: [Twisted-Python] AMP message length limit

2015-11-28 Thread Oon-Ee Ng
On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 10:41 PM, Glyph Lefkowitz wrote: > > On Nov 25, 2015, at 04:54, Oon-Ee Ng wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 11:03 AM, Oon-Ee Ng wrote: > > And furthermore that when I do that, callRemote no longer returns a > deferred (which makes sense, really) and instead gets a None.

Re: [Twisted-Python] AMP message length limit

2015-11-28 Thread Glyph Lefkowitz
> On Nov 25, 2015, at 04:54, Oon-Ee Ng wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 11:03 AM, Oon-Ee Ng wrote: >> And furthermore that when I do that, callRemote no longer returns a >> deferred (which makes sense, really) and instead gets a None. One more >> check before I add my default errBacks then. O

Re: [Twisted-Python] AMP message length limit

2015-11-25 Thread Oon-Ee Ng
On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 11:03 AM, Oon-Ee Ng wrote: > And furthermore that when I do that, callRemote no longer returns a > deferred (which makes sense, really) and instead gets a None. One more > check before I add my default errBacks then. Optimised network traffic > sounds positive, at the least

Re: [Twisted-Python] AMP message length limit

2015-11-23 Thread Oon-Ee Ng
On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 10:58 AM, Oon-Ee Ng wrote: > On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 9:16 AM, Oon-Ee Ng wrote: >> >> Thanks, right now I just have plenty of return {} everywhere. Does >> requiresAnswer=False mean less bandwidth usage (no need to transmit an >> empty dict)? > > Having read the documentati

Re: [Twisted-Python] AMP message length limit

2015-11-23 Thread Oon-Ee Ng
On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 9:16 AM, Oon-Ee Ng wrote: > > Thanks, right now I just have plenty of return {} everywhere. Does > requiresAnswer=False mean less bandwidth usage (no need to transmit an > empty dict)? Having read the documentation a bit, it appears requiresAnswer=False is a hint and I'd s

Re: [Twisted-Python] AMP message length limit

2015-11-23 Thread Oon-Ee Ng
On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 8:54 AM, Glyph Lefkowitz wrote: > I'm sorry that this was an unpleasant surprise. I wish that we had a better > way of getting this across up-front :-). However, it seems like the length > limit is doing its job in terms of constraining your protocol design to not > have

Re: [Twisted-Python] AMP message length limit

2015-11-22 Thread Glyph Lefkowitz
> On Nov 22, 2015, at 17:51, Oon-Ee Ng wrote: > > I've just (to my surprise) hit this. As I understand from searching > around, AMP messages are limited to ~64k due to the length prefix > being 16-bit. A change in my internal data being sent (using dicts > rather than lists) kicked one of my mes