Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
Kafka, mail # user - could an Encoder/Decoder be stateful?


Copy link to this message
-
Re: could an Encoder/Decoder be stateful?
Jun Rao 2013-05-17, 14:53
Possible, but definitely a post 0.8 item. If you are interested, could you
file a jira to track this?

Thanks,

Jun
On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 10:06 PM, Rob Withers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Could the producer be adapted to support the interface of the consumer?
>
> Thanks,
> rob
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jun Rao [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2013 10:04 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: could an Encoder/Decoder be stateful?
> >
> > The encoder instance can't be shared in different producers since it's
> > instantiated through java reflection. Decoder instance can actually be
> shared
> > by different consumers since it's passed in directly through the consumer
> api.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Jun
> >
> >
> > On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 5:58 AM, Withers, Robert
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> >
> > > Is there a way to share an encoder instance, or inject shared state,
> > > across producers/consumers?  Guice?
> > > ________________________________________
> > > From: Jun Rao [[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 11:02 PM
> > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Subject: Re: could an Encoder/Decoder be stateful?
> > >
> > > Each producer/consumer uses a single instance of the encoder/decoder.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Jun
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 7:20 PM, Rob Withers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Or is the same instance used for each (un)marshaling?  It would be
> > > > nice
> > > to
> > > > have a cache and a duplicateMsgChecker function, from the app above
> > > > to ensure transactional guarantees, and object ref substitutions
> > > > during (de)serialization, to enable durable distributed objects and
> > promises.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > rob
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
>
>