Description

changwoo

opened on Sep 2, 2022

Issue body actions

I saw the news of timestamp extension support on version 0.9.0 and tried it. But I still can't (de)serialize timestamps with the 0.9.3 version. Is it supported also when using Jackson?

I did like this and the "Instant" was serialized as a map of string keys "epochSecond"/"nano" and uint32 values.

private static class A {
    @JsonProperty(index = 0)
    Instant instant = Instant.now();
}

....

    A a = new A();
    ObjectMapper objectMapper = new MessagePackMapper();
    byte[] bytes = objectMapper.writeValueAsBytes(a);

Activity

1. komamitsu

   self-assigned this

   on Sep 8, 2022
2. komamitsu commented on Sep 9, 2022

   

   komamitsu

   on Sep 9, 2022

   Member

   More actions

   Yes. I don't think Jackson can handle private classes.

   public class Pojo {
       public int i = 42;
       public Instant now = Instant.now();
   }
   
     :
   
       ObjectMapper mapper = new ObjectMapper(new MessagePackFactory());
       Pojo x = new Pojo();
       byte[] bytes = mapper.writeValueAsBytes(x);
       System.out.println(mapper.readValue(bytes, new TypeReference<Map<String, Object>>() {}));
           >>>> {i=42, now={epochSecond=1662712326, nano=653000000}}
3. komamitsu

   closed this as completedon Sep 9, 2022
4. changwoo commented on Sep 11, 2022

   

   changwoo

   on Sep 11, 2022

   Author

   More actions

   Yes. I don't think Jackson can handle private classes.

   public class Pojo {
       public int i = 42;
       public Instant now = Instant.now();
   }
   
     :
   
       ObjectMapper mapper = new ObjectMapper(new MessagePackFactory());
       Pojo x = new Pojo();
       byte[] bytes = mapper.writeValueAsBytes(x);
       System.out.println(mapper.readValue(bytes, new TypeReference<Map<String, Object>>() {}));
           >>>> {i=42, now={epochSecond=1662712326, nano=653000000}}

   Jackson CAN handle private classes.

   I mean, the timestamps were not serialized in the extension format.

   Your example Pojo class was serialized like this:

   // 82 a1 69 2a a3 6e 6f 77 82 ab 65 70 6f 63 68 53 65 63 6f 6e 64 ce 63 1d 90 50 a4 6e 61 6e 6f ce 05 8b 11 40 
   //       i  42    n  o  w        e  p  o  c  h  S  e  c  o  n  d                    n  a  n  o
   

   This is not the timestamp extension format. It's just a map with string keys and uint32 values.
5. komamitsu commented on Sep 11, 2022

   

   komamitsu

   on Sep 11, 2022

   Member

   More actions

   Oops. Sorry, I misread your comment the other way around.

   Supporting only Instant shouldn't be difficult. But someone may want to use java.time.LocalDateTime or other classes. Let me think about it...
6. komamitsu

   reopened this on Sep 11, 2022
7. komamitsu

   closed this as completedin #677on Sep 14, 2022
8. komamitsu commented on Sep 14, 2022

   

   komamitsu

   on Sep 14, 2022

   Member

   More actions

   We decided to simply support only Instant. With the feature introduced by #677, Instant instances will be serialized and deserialized automatically.

Issue actions