Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
bertclient 0.3 and bertlet 0.2 released
There are currently too many topics in this group that display first. To make this topic appear first, remove this option from another topic.
There was an error processing your request. Please try again.
flag
  1 message - Collapse all  -  Translate all to Translated (View all originals)
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post will appear after it is approved by moderators
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
Jared Kuolt (Lucky)  
View profile  
 More options Mar 31 2010, 2:44 pm
From: "Jared Kuolt (Lucky)" <luckythetour...@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 11:44:42 -0700
Local: Wed, Mar 31 2010 2:44 pm
Subject: bertclient 0.3 and bertlet 0.2 released
bertclient, a threadsafe BERT-RPC library for Ruby has been updated to
version 0.3. It's hosted on RubyGems.org so you can simply "gem
install bertclient". 0.3 has gzip support following the usage pattern
of bertlet (see below).

bertlet, a BERT-RPC implementation using Eventlet (Python), has been
updated to 0.2. It's now up on PyPi so easy_install or pip should
work. Changes since 0.1:

 - Basic middleware support
 - ssl
 - gzip
 - protocol error handling
 - private/hidden functions (underscore prepended)

**NOTE**: As far as I know, these two libraries are the only ones to
support gzip.

A note on how gzip is used: My first thought on using gzip was to
create a new header for a new protocol implementation, but I quickly
realized that this can be done using info berps. This is approximately
what the transaction looks like:

  -> {info, encoding, [gzip]}
  -> {gzip, <<"...">> }

This gzip packet is inflated and would look like a normal request:

  -> {request, call, foo, bar, [...]}

The gzip response is identical in form.

This may not be the perfect route for gzip support, but it works well
for us. If anyone has any input (besides "Use HTTP" ;P), please let me
know. Thanks!

--
Jared "Lucky" Kuolt


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
End of messages
« Back to Discussions « Newer topic     Older topic »