From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <kostja.osipov@gmail.com> Received: from mail-lf1-f66.google.com (mail-lf1-f66.google.com [209.85.167.66]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dev.tarantool.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8F024441841 for <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>; Wed, 25 Mar 2020 14:13:24 +0300 (MSK) Received: by mail-lf1-f66.google.com with SMTP id t16so600696lfl.2 for <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>; Wed, 25 Mar 2020 04:13:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2020 14:13:22 +0300 From: Konstantin Osipov <kostja.osipov@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20200325111322.GB5417@atlas> References: <cover.1585053742.git.lvasiliev@tarantool.org> <7982fc7b062b2424689a990de1f76ca2ff0e4f50.1585053743.git.lvasiliev@tarantool.org> <20200324200216.GA18984@atlas> <178dd6a0-cdee-532c-3d0a-af76062d5f6c@tarantool.org> <20200325084205.GG18984@atlas> <CADqioP3WatCGO6MdYSSH9bxD_kJcOpYjFxqV=uSh87_0WTWnew@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <CADqioP3WatCGO6MdYSSH9bxD_kJcOpYjFxqV=uSh87_0WTWnew@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH 3/6] iproto: Add negotiation phase List-Id: Tarantool development patches <tarantool-patches.dev.tarantool.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.tarantool.org/mailman/options/tarantool-patches>, <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://lists.tarantool.org/pipermail/tarantool-patches/> List-Post: <mailto:tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org> List-Help: <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.tarantool.org/mailman/listinfo/tarantool-patches>, <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=subscribe> To: Eugene Leonovich <gen.work@gmail.com> Cc: tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org * Eugene Leonovich <gen.work@gmail.com> [20/03/25 14:00]: > > A much simpler way to do it is to have a server switch to enable > > new features. > > It is less flexible, of course, because you can't have old and new > > clients, but do you really want to have old and new clients? > > > I do agree with Kostya, I think it's a good compromise. In my humble > opinion, the extended error feature in its current state is not worth the > complexity and overhead it adds. Instead, why not introduce a Tarantool > setting to choose whether you want to deal with a legacy or extended error > response type (and it's very unlikely that someone will need to have 2 > types at the same time). By default this setting will be set to use the > legacy mode, then after N minor 2.x releases, it can be changed to use the > new error type, the setting itself will be marked as deprecated and removed > in the next major release. From a connector's point of view, it will also > be easy to check if there are any additional fields in the response body, > which would mean that the connector has received a "new" error. More community on the patches list! Yay! -- Konstantin Osipov, Moscow, Russia