protocol buffer lite versus regular protocol buffer

Question

I've been investigating c++ serialization frameworks will small footprint and good performance. I've found this thread

which basically suggest to use the lite version of protocol buffers. It is not clear from this page what are the specific features of the lite version

my question is; what features do you lose when sticking to protocol buffers lite?

score 52 · Accepted Answer · edited Sep 14 '21 at 12:49

52

The "lite" version is not able to serialize to or from ~~iostream, or~~ "FileDescriptor", and it cannot use the Reflection feature (although it does use refection), and... a scattering of other features.

My advice is to just use the lite version until you come across a feature that requires the full version. It is very easy to switch from one to the other.

If you need to see a list of what the lite version lacks, I recommend browsing <google/protobuf/message.h>. Basically everything in that include file is exclusive to the full version. (<google/protobuf/message_lite.h> is #included from the full version.) Here's a link: https://github.com/google/protobuf/blob/master/src/google/protobuf/message.h

edited Sep 14 '21 at 12:49

Geezer

5,600
18
31

answered Jun 20 '11 at 00:16

karadoc

2,641
22
21

3

Don't forget to add `option optimize_for = LITE_RUNTIME;` to your .proto files if you use the lite version. – rustyx Mar 02 '17 at 15:55
49

Reading above comments is an emotional roller coaster. – coredump Apr 19 '19 at 14:57
Edited to reflect existence (at present) of `SerializeToOstream()` in `class MessageLite` – Geezer Sep 14 '21 at 12:50

protocol buffer lite versus regular protocol buffer

1 Answers1