thrift-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Bad type in structure
Date Mon, 22 Feb 2010 18:59:59 GMT
Actually it is a VERY good solution.  That you can (and should) do this is a
major feature of Thrift which allows some level of future proofing of the
interface.

Read the original thrift paper.  You should never re-use an index for a
different purpose if there is any chance at all that old/new clients will
interact with new/old servers (i.e. anywhere in the known universe).

On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 10:54 AM, Noam Wolf <noam.wolf@gmail.com> wrote:

> it was my understanding that the id's were a unique, sequential, index... i
> guess it makes sense that they don't need to be sequential but if I don't
> have control over the server this might not be a good solution.
>
> On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 6:41 PM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunning@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > It might help if you changed the id number on the argument when you
> change
> > the semantics.  That will let your applications fail in cases like this.
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 10:17 AM, Noam Wolf <noam.wolf@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Basically my service call changed from
> > >
> > > doSomething(1: String request)
> > >
> > > to
> > >
> > > doSomething(1: Request request)
> > >
> > > So when I was calling doSomething("foo") i was seeing that error
> because
> > > the
> > > type i was passing to the service was not the correct type...
> > >
> > > hopefully this will help someone some day...
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Ted Dunning, CTO
> > DeepDyve
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Noam Wolf
>



-- 
Ted Dunning, CTO
DeepDyve

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message