From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <kostja.osipov@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-lj1-f195.google.com (mail-lj1-f195.google.com
 [209.85.208.195])
 (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 9F72E4696C3
 for <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>;
 Fri, 17 Apr 2020 10:35:42 +0300 (MSK)
Received: by mail-lj1-f195.google.com with SMTP id j3so983736ljg.8
 for <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>;
 Fri, 17 Apr 2020 00:35:42 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2020 10:35:40 +0300
From: Konstantin Osipov <kostja.osipov@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20200417073540.GA4007@atlas>
References: <cover.1587058424.git.lvasiliev@tarantool.org>
 <9ad134f42e6b11bf030f80d90435aac512db0784.1587058424.git.lvasiliev@tarantool.org>
 <20200416194835.GA3623@atlas>
 <4ff74326-f83d-599d-fcda-c7d8175c9263@tarantool.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4ff74326-f83d-599d-fcda-c7d8175c9263@tarantool.org>
Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH V4 4/6] error: add session setting
 for error type marshaling
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: Vladislav Shpilevoy <v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org>
Cc: tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org

* Vladislav Shpilevoy <v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org> [20/04/17 10:16]:
> Seems like you are talking about the case when error object is
> thrown as an exception. But the patchset is about being able to
> recognize and decode errors even when they are returned inside
> response body, as a part of IPROTO_OK response type.

Then you think this justifies inventing a custom marshalling
scheme and thus forcing all clients to not just patch the driver
but also patch or even re-implement msgpack library they use? 

Worse yet, with such a huge protocol change you can add complete
marshalling of any object - SQL parse tree, Lua thread along with
all its referenced objects, Lua code and stack data, and what not
-- all very desired for other features, like distributed SQL or 
shipping/executing Lua code close to data.

Worse *yet*, it's quite possible to add all these features without
an MP_EXT. But this doesn't concern you at all. 

So what about an RFC?

-- 
Konstantin Osipov, Moscow, Russia