For me this has always been an action item that was closely related to the Compact JSON work, hoping to iron out how we'd be able to specify very concisely what's to be expected in the payload in Compact JSON already and then come up with a representation in which we could use a more binary (read: less human readable) format to optimize the communication further. Back then I'd looked at a bunch of binary formats that would potentially make sense, MessagePack and ProtoBuf (the later one even more so since we use build on GRPC), but the time couldn't find any that I liked because either 1) they didn't have a separation between metadata data and a data file, 2) didn't support collections without needing to know the size up front easily (a definite no go for us) or 3) didn't feel we could easily be embedded in our serialization abstraction logic.
So to answer your question, other then early investigations, I've not gotten to this again, wasn't planning to until we'd have taken the next step on Compact JSON (which is effectively taking my proposal - which we have in production - and merge in all the ideas/thoughts we had since and come up with a normative proposal for it).
Cheers,
-H
Hubert Heijkers | STSM, Chief Architect TM1 Server and OData Evangelist | IBM Business Analytics | +31-621-394123
"The crisis of today is the joke of tomorrow" - H.G. Wells
Christof Sprenger ---31-07-2020 08:29:54 PM---Hubert, We recently stumbled upon MessagePack<INVALID URI REMOVEDFrom: Christof Sprenger <chrispre@microsoft.com>
To: Hubert Heijkers <hubert.heijkers@nl.ibm.com>
Cc: "odata@lists.oasis-open.org" <odata@lists.oasis-open.org>
Date: 31-07-2020 08:29 PM
Subject: [EXTERNAL] action item 3913 - Concept for binary data format