Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

job data serialization: alternative serialization methods? #3

Closed
SEAPUNK opened this issue Sep 28, 2016 · 6 comments
Closed

job data serialization: alternative serialization methods? #3

SEAPUNK opened this issue Sep 28, 2016 · 6 comments

Comments

@SEAPUNK
Copy link
Owner

SEAPUNK commented Sep 28, 2016

right now, we are only allowing the job to be created if the data can be stringified with JSON

what if we allow things like msgpack?

@SEAPUNK
Copy link
Owner Author

SEAPUNK commented Sep 28, 2016

job data, if stored, will need to be stored as a binary blob if we're doing things like msgpack
what about job data type specification??? deserialization?

@SEAPUNK
Copy link
Owner Author

SEAPUNK commented Sep 28, 2016

okay how about this:

when creating a job, you specify in the options what the job data type and serializer is
when creating the job runner, you must be explicit in saying that the runner supports alternative job data deserializers, so binary blobs can be sent to the runner

@SEAPUNK
Copy link
Owner Author

SEAPUNK commented Sep 28, 2016

otherwise, it's JSON by default

@SEAPUNK
Copy link
Owner Author

SEAPUNK commented Sep 28, 2016

...or maybe not. i'm having thoughts of doing it the "websocket" way and giving you either a "string" data (in this case, parsed JSON), or "binary" data (the custom data)

or maybe in the manager stub you have to specify the supported custom deserializers?

this is a confusing topic

@SEAPUNK
Copy link
Owner Author

SEAPUNK commented Sep 29, 2016

lmao no

@SEAPUNK
Copy link
Owner Author

SEAPUNK commented Sep 29, 2016

If someone wants it, they'll open up an issue for it, and I'll judge the use cases, and complexity of implementation. Most likely, things like those binary blobs could be done in another way, e.g. pointing to the binary blob resource that the runner's code could download, and process like that.

Yeah, I think that's much better.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant