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

Use protobuf 2.5.0 #1071

Closed
wmrowan opened this Issue Jun 24, 2013 · 6 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@wmrowan
Contributor

wmrowan commented Jun 24, 2013

The version of libprotobuf we use (implicitly at least) is 2.4.1 because that's what's in the ubuntu repositories. We should look into upgrading to 2.5.0. It contains some speed upgrades and interface changes I'd like to take advantage of.

@AtnNn, how hard would it be to link against the newer libprotobuf when building rethinkdb? This is also relevant to building the new python driver backend. Pip only has version 2.5.0 by the way so the distributed version of the python driver will be using it anyway.

@AtnNn

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@AtnNn

AtnNn Jun 24, 2013

Member

We would have to link to it statically when building the ubuntu packages, which is easy to do but is annoying for users.

How much work would it take to adapt the rethinkdb server to the interface changes?

Can the javascript and ruby drivers work with 1.5.0?

For the upcoming rethinkdb export (#193), we need to distribute the python driver along with rethinkdb, which means we need to depend on native packages and not on pip packages.

Member

AtnNn commented Jun 24, 2013

We would have to link to it statically when building the ubuntu packages, which is easy to do but is annoying for users.

How much work would it take to adapt the rethinkdb server to the interface changes?

Can the javascript and ruby drivers work with 1.5.0?

For the upcoming rethinkdb export (#193), we need to distribute the python driver along with rethinkdb, which means we need to depend on native packages and not on pip packages.

@wmrowan

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@wmrowan

wmrowan Jun 24, 2013

Contributor

We wouldn't have to do anything to adapt the server to interface changes unless we wanted to use them. I'm mostly interested in this for it's implications for #1026. The javascript and ruby drivers don't use the google packages so they are not sensitive to the versioning of the main google protobuf library like our C++ and Python protobuf code is.

Contributor

wmrowan commented Jun 24, 2013

We wouldn't have to do anything to adapt the server to interface changes unless we wanted to use them. I'm mostly interested in this for it's implications for #1026. The javascript and ruby drivers don't use the google packages so they are not sensitive to the versioning of the main google protobuf library like our C++ and Python protobuf code is.

@danielmewes

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@danielmewes

danielmewes Jun 26, 2014

Member

@AtnNn Is this issue still up to date?

Member

danielmewes commented Jun 26, 2014

@AtnNn Is this issue still up to date?

@AtnNn

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@AtnNn

AtnNn Jun 26, 2014

Member

./configure --fetch protobuf currently fetches 2.5.0.

When it is available, we link against the system's libprotobuf. In many cases this is still 2.4.1 and not 2.5.0.

I think the status quo is best.

Member

AtnNn commented Jun 26, 2014

./configure --fetch protobuf currently fetches 2.5.0.

When it is available, we link against the system's libprotobuf. In many cases this is still 2.4.1 and not 2.5.0.

I think the status quo is best.

@danielmewes

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@danielmewes

danielmewes Jun 26, 2014

Member

So can we close this?

Member

danielmewes commented Jun 26, 2014

So can we close this?

@AtnNn

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@AtnNn

AtnNn Jun 26, 2014

Member

Closing as wontfix

Member

AtnNn commented Jun 26, 2014

Closing as wontfix

@AtnNn AtnNn closed this Jun 26, 2014

@AtnNn AtnNn modified the milestones: wontfix, backlog Jun 26, 2014

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment