off-topic 2019-05-28 | Slack Archive

upgradingdave19:05:08

I’m using transit on a project. I haven’t ever used protobuf, but was just recently asked about what the benefit of transit is over protobuf … anyone have any opinions?

danielstockton19:05:08

@upgradingdave transit piggybacks on json and is therefore more appropriate for server-browser interactions (browser has efficient/fast json deserialization built-in). Transit is also self describing, whereas protobufs need a pre-defined schema.

👍 12

upgradingdave19:05:33

makes sense, thanks!

Jag Gunawardana20:05:06

I’ve found that I’m starting to use transit where I would have used Apache AVRO in the past. Would be nice if it played with a few more languages, guess that’s an opportunity for people to contribute libraries….

gklijs21:05:12

Avro recently got a new release. Why do you like Avro over Transit?

Jag Gunawardana06:05:18

I’m not sure that I really have a preference. I need to find out more about transit. The main reason I’ve been using it more is that I find more libraries play well with it when in the clojure(script) land. I have some services written in Golang and I find that AVRO plays well in polyglot places. Does anyone else have much experience of both?

Jag Gunawardana07:05:21

I use GRPC as a sync (RPC) between services, but I often send messages (AVRO or Transit) over this transport. I think that the self-describing protocols are far better than protobufs.

2019-05-28

Channels