[GitHub] [arrow] jacques-n commented on a change in pull request #12636: ARROW-15921: [Format][FlightRPC][C++][Java] Clarify interpretation of FlightEndpoint.locations

[GitBox <gi...@apache.org>]

jacques-n commented on a change in pull request #12636:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/12636#discussion_r829397014



##########
File path: format/Flight.proto
##########
@@ -280,9 +281,16 @@ message FlightEndpoint {
   Ticket ticket = 1;
 
   /*
-   * A list of URIs where this ticket can be redeemed. If the list is
-   * empty, the expectation is that the ticket can only be redeemed on the
-   * current service where the ticket was generated.
+   * A list of URIs where this ticket can be redeemed.
+   *
+   * If the list is empty, the expectation is that the ticket can only
+   * be redeemed on the current service where the ticket was
+   * generated.
+   *
+   * If the list is not empty, the expectation is that the ticket can
+   * be redeemed at any of the locations, and that the data returned
+   * will be equivalent. In other words, multiple locations provide
+   * redundancy/load balancing.

Review comment:
       I think the reason the original might be thought of as ambiguous is that people are failing to see that tickets were conceived of as single use. If tickets are single use, once I go to one location and use the ticket, I can't then use the ticket at a second location. A flight must be a consumption of all tickets to be complete. I wonder if instead of expressing here, we should clarify elsewhere that a ticket is single use and reuse of ticket results in undefined behavior. Thoughts?




-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: github-unsubscribe@arrow.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org