[jira] [Commented] (CALCITE-840) Protobuf transport for Avatica

["Julian Hyde (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-840?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14735633#comment-14735633 ] 

Julian Hyde commented on CALCITE-840:
-------------------------------------

Removing the jackson annotations should be a separate commit, but I think we should do it as part of this task. Otherwise when will it get done? Also, the client now depends on both protobuf and jackson - a client using the protobuf transport should not depend on jackson. I don't mind whether the commit is sequenced before or after the protobuf transport.

Another thing that needs to get done as part of this task is CALCITE-687. With intermittent test failures we have no confidence in the Avatica stack at present.

Regarding code generation. Which is simpler: committing generated code, or generating as part of the build? If either option does not require protobuf to be installed on the build machine (using e.g. apt-get install) that would be preferable.

> Protobuf transport for Avatica
> ------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CALCITE-840
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-840
>             Project: Calcite
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: avatica
>            Reporter: Julian Hyde
>            Assignee: Josh Elser
>             Fix For: 1.5.0-incubating
>
>         Attachments: CALCITE-840.001.patch, CALCITE-840.002.patch, CALCITE-840.003.patch, CALCITE-840.004.patch
>
>
> Create a transport for Avatica that uses Protobuf.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)