Schema Registry: Change to use BinaryContent and change Encoder to Serializer #27598
Conversation
conniey
requested review from
alzimmermsft,
samvaity,
g2vinay,
sjkwak,
srnagar,
anuchandy,
lmolkova,
pallavit,
vcolin7,
mssfang,
JonathanGiles,
billwert and
kasobol-msft
as code owners
ghost
added
conniey
changed the title
|
API changes have been detected in |
|
API changes have been detected in |
conniey
force-pushed
the
schemaregistry/binary-content
branch
from
9a00ddd
to
6091b10
Compare
| @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ | |||
| * An abstraction for a message containing a content type along with its data. | |||
| */ | |||
| @Fluent | |||
| public class MessageWithMetadata { | |||
| public class BinaryContent { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We would now have BinaryData and BinaryContent as public types and another implementation type i.e. BinaryDataContent. This is likely going to confuse us in future :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, this is going to be confusing. BinaryData and BinaryContent are very similar.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This was based on architect feedback. The other languages also have moved their names to this and also have BinaryData. I can add you to the thread if you want.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The idea is that BinaryContent contains BinaryData along with the content type. We didn't think it would be confusing as they are two related and similarly named types, rather than being just two similarly named types.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I set-up a quick chat on Monday. Might be easier to get all the thoughts in the same room.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Java already has BinaryDataContent which is wrapped by BinaryData but that's currently internal. Also, when deciding which type to use, would there be a scenario where we want to use BinaryData and not BinaryContent given that content type in BinaryContent is optional?
One option was to move content type property to BinaryData but this may not be possible as we want to make this the super type for Event Hubs and Service Bus event and message types. If this type is intended for extension in Event Hubs and Service Bus, should we make this type abstract?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It was initially abstract, but we made it concrete to make it easier for use with Schema Registry that didn't involve Service Bus/Event Hubs. However, I think we can still make this scenario easy by having a private implementation that we return if the user doesn't specify a more specific BinaryContent type. This would allow us to move the type back to being abstract which I believe would address your concerns around any confusion that might arise from how this type is meant to be used.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Here is what this change would look like in .NET - Azure/azure-sdk-for-net#27525
After making the class abstract, I needed to add two additional generic overloads that only took the TData instead of both the TEnvelope and TData. This was necessary in order to leave in our generic type constraint that TEnvelope have an empty public constructor. When using the new overloads we would construct the internal DefaultBinaryContent and return that to the user. The new overloads make the sample code simpler since now the generic arguments can be completely inferred based on the input data.
| @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ | |||
| * An abstraction for a message containing a content type along with its data. | |||
| */ | |||
| @Fluent | |||
| public class MessageWithMetadata { | |||
| public class BinaryContent { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, this is going to be confusing. BinaryData and BinaryContent are very similar.
sdk/schemaregistry/azure-data-schemaregistry-apacheavro/README.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...java/com/azure/data/schemaregistry/apacheavro/SchemaRegistryApacheAvroSerializerBuilder.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...stry-apacheavro/src/samples/java/com/azure/data/schemaregistry/apacheavro/ReadmeSamples.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
API changes have been detected in |
Description
Based on conversations with architects, this updates:
PRs from other languages:
If an SDK is being regenerated based on a new swagger spec, a link to the pull request containing these swagger spec changes has been included above.
All SDK Contribution checklist:
General Guidelines and Best Practices
Testing Guidelines