https://code.cor-lab.de/https://code.cor-lab.de/favicon.ico?14019720732012-02-08T22:06:23ZOpen Source Collaboration PlatformRSBag - Bug #867: Include IDL in channel format fieldhttps://code.cor-lab.de/issues/867?journal_id=20202012-02-08T22:06:23ZJ. Moringenjmoringe@cor-lab.uni-bielefeld.de
<ul><li><strong>Priority</strong> changed from <i>Normal</i> to <i>High</i></li></ul> RSBag - Bug #867: Include IDL in channel format fieldhttps://code.cor-lab.de/issues/867?journal_id=20802012-02-23T14:41:02ZJ. Moringenjmoringe@cor-lab.uni-bielefeld.de
<ul></ul><p>To achieve the requested behavior in the upcoming release, our current plan is to</p>
<ol>
<li>Extend the TIDELog specification such that multiple IDLs can be stored in the <code>CHAN.format</code> field by making it a list of blobs instead of single blob. We would submit this modification for inclusion in future versions of the TIDELog specification.</li>
<li>Implement filesystem-based lookup and reading of IDL in <code>bag-record</code>.</li>
</ol>
<p>@Ingo: Is 1) OK for you or do you have different plans?</p> RSBag - Bug #867: Include IDL in channel format fieldhttps://code.cor-lab.de/issues/867?journal_id=20812012-02-23T14:41:08ZJ. Moringenjmoringe@cor-lab.uni-bielefeld.de
<ul><li><strong>Target version</strong> set to <i>0.6</i></li></ul> RSBag - Bug #867: Include IDL in channel format fieldhttps://code.cor-lab.de/issues/867?journal_id=20822012-02-23T15:12:44ZI. Lütkebohleiluetkeb@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de
<ul></ul><p>The expectation in the definition of the "format" field is that can you simply drop it, as-is, into your chosen serialization library, and have it parse the corresponding messages. The reason for this is that it makes the interaction with the serialization library unidirectional.</p>
<p>If you instead make it into a list on the TIDE level, this will result in bidirectional interaction with the serialization library, because it will need to go back to the TIDE log to look up further type information. This requires extensibility on the side of the serialization library that may be missing.</p>
<p>Therefore, I wouldn't recommend it. My suggestion would be to have an internal structure within the format field that allows including multiple message definitions. This structure may be specific to your serialization format.</p> RSBag - Bug #867: Include IDL in channel format fieldhttps://code.cor-lab.de/issues/867?journal_id=20832012-02-24T12:39:23ZS. Wredeswrede@cor-lab.uni-bielefeld.de
<ul></ul><p>Thanks for the clarification. We also thought already about inventing a micro-format to represent the respective information but wondered if that would be in the spirit of the log format. That said, we we will try to come up with an initial solution to this as part of the next RSB release <a href="https://code.cor-lab.de/versions/25" class="version">0.6</a>.</p> RSBag - Bug #867: Include IDL in channel format fieldhttps://code.cor-lab.de/issues/867?journal_id=20862012-02-24T15:56:11ZJ. Moringenjmoringe@cor-lab.uni-bielefeld.de
<ul><li><strong>Assignee</strong> set to <i>J. Moringen</i></li></ul> RSBag - Bug #867: Include IDL in channel format fieldhttps://code.cor-lab.de/issues/867?journal_id=21532012-03-02T20:49:39ZJ. Moringenjmoringe@cor-lab.uni-bielefeld.de
<ul><li><strong>Status</strong> changed from <i>New</i> to <i>In Progress</i></li><li><strong>% Done</strong> changed from <i>0</i> to <i>20</i></li></ul> RSBag - Bug #867: Include IDL in channel format fieldhttps://code.cor-lab.de/issues/867?journal_id=21542012-03-04T16:01:18ZJ. Moringenjmoringe@cor-lab.uni-bielefeld.de
<ul><li><strong>% Done</strong> changed from <i>20</i> to <i>70</i></li></ul>We will address this issue only very basically for the 0.6 release:
<ul>
<li>Users will have to load IDLs into <code>bag-record</code> manually <br /> (via <code>--idl-path</code> and <code>--load-idl</code> as with the Common Lisp <code>logger</code>)</li>
<li>We will store two textual Protocol Buffer definitions in the <code>format</code> field of each channel:
<ol>
<li><code>rsb.protocol.Notification</code> and its transitive dependency closure </li>
<li>Payload type and its transitive dependency closure, if possible<br /> This can fail (possibly generating a warning, but continuing the recording) if
<ul>
<li>The payload type is not a protocol buffer type</li>
<li>The corresponding IDL has not been loaded</li>
<li>The corresponding IDL version does not match the actual payload<br /> <strong>this problem will not be detected</strong></li>
</ul>
</li>
</ol>
</li>
<li>The two textual definitions are separated by a <code>:</code> character</li>
<li>The stored IDL information will not be used by any tools, for now</li>
</ul> RSBag - Bug #867: Include IDL in channel format fieldhttps://code.cor-lab.de/issues/867?journal_id=21562012-03-04T17:03:42ZI. Lütkebohleiluetkeb@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de
<ul></ul><p>Regarding detection of a mismatch between IDL and what's being used: Is there a checksum field in the message which could be checked against? ROS and LCM have md5 sums of the idl for this.</p> RSBag - Bug #867: Include IDL in channel format fieldhttps://code.cor-lab.de/issues/867?journal_id=21572012-03-04T19:46:56ZJ. Moringenjmoringe@cor-lab.uni-bielefeld.de
<ul></ul>Currently, RSB events contain a "wire-schema" string which designates a payload serialization. However, this method is insufficient for two things:
<ol>
<li>Distinguishing serialization mechanisms (e.g. protocol buffer serialization vs. something else)</li>
<li>Verifying that a given payload has actually been serialized by means of the specified serialization mechanism</li>
</ol> RSBag - Bug #867: Include IDL in channel format fieldhttps://code.cor-lab.de/issues/867?journal_id=21582012-03-04T21:10:12ZJ. Moringenjmoringe@cor-lab.uni-bielefeld.de
<ul><li><strong>Status</strong> changed from <i>In Progress</i> to <i>Resolved</i></li><li><strong>% Done</strong> changed from <i>70</i> to <i>100</i></li></ul><p>Applied in changeset r345.</p> RSBag - Bug #867: Include IDL in channel format fieldhttps://code.cor-lab.de/issues/867?journal_id=26982012-07-20T10:57:34ZJ. Moringenjmoringe@cor-lab.uni-bielefeld.de
<ul><li><strong>Subject</strong> changed from <i>Include IDL in Channel Format Field</i> to <i>Include IDL in channel format field</i></li></ul>