OkHttp VS gRPC

We will use Square’s Mock Webserver to spin up a mock server which we can use to simulate real api's request to the get coffee endpoint.

OkHttp Documentation

mockwebserver -> https://github.com/square/okhttp/tree/master/mockwebserver

I searched in the OkHttp GitHub project for an advice on which values may be suitable for Android apps nowadays but found no answers (only this old issue which does not help). Since we share a single OkHttp client Singleton for all our retrofit APIs and even Coil, I wonder if the default 5 maxRequestsPerHost is really enough.

You can technically add a Content-Length header for each part. It's not forbidden by the RFC, but nor is it common. It caused [problems](https://github.com/square/okhttp/issues/2138) for OkHttp, and they eventually removed it. Might be fine for internal-only use, though.

Boundaries are a lot like UUIDs, and rely on the same logic. When generating random data, once you have enough bits, the odds are against that sequence of bits ever having been generated before in the universe.

Lets be specific. This is the gradle build file for Squares okhttp client library. How exactly would your bld tool "predict" or "help" with all the parameters needed? There is no need to be defensive. Replace those large build files with your own, show where your approach is better and then understanding will lead to better solutions.

And adding to that: The asynchttpclient library is just a thin wrapper around OkHttp3, so it might be easier to just go with that instead: https://square.github.io/okhttp/

Retrofit in combination with OkHttp for fetching data from server (which hopefully already exists)

OkHttp

That's not true at all. Case in point In general, this is not a problem that AGC can solve. The language can help (something Java is admittedly particularly bad at) but even so, there'll always be avenues for leaks. That's just the nature of shared things. Interestingly, in the linked grpc case, the leaked memory is only half the problem -- AGC doesn't help at all with the leaked HTTP2 connection.

I've trialled my new image with an existing project via JLink that's heavy on Netty and gRPC the image works great (with a small tweak to exclude grpc-netty-shaded due to grpc-java#9083).

When developing an application, the vast majority of code is written by other people. We import that code and make use of it to get whatever we need done. In this case, the developer of an various android applications are using grpc-java.

`proto_library` for building the `.bin` file from protos works great. Generating stubs/messages for "all" languages does not. Each language does not want to implement gRPC rules, the gRPC team does not want to implement rules for each language. Sort of a deadlock situation. For example:

- C++: https://github.com/grpc/grpc/blob/master/bazel/cc_grpc_libra...

- Python: https://github.com/grpc/grpc/blob/master/bazel/python_rules....

- ObjC: https://github.com/grpc/grpc/blob/master/bazel/objc_grpc_lib...

- Java: https://github.com/grpc/grpc-java/blob/master/java_grpc_libr...

- Go (different semantics than all of the other): https://github.com/bazelbuild/rules_go/blob/master/proto/def...

But there's also no real cohesion within the community. The biggest effort to date has been in https://github.com/stackb/rules_proto which integrates with gazelle.

tl;dr: Low alignment results in diverging implementations that are complicated to understand for newcomers. Buff's approach is much more appealing as it's a "this is the one way to do the right thing" and having it just work by detecting `proto_library` and doing all of the linting/registry stuff automagically in CI would be fantastic.

Small clarification (to my understanding, I'm not a Java Guru) on why Java got on top - those Java implementations use something called Direct Executor. It's super performant when there's no chance of a blocking operation. But if you are to do anything more than echo service, you might be in trouble. Other implementations probably don't suffer from the same constraint. The related discussion can be found in this PR.

clone https://github.com/grpc/grpc-java

If you do streaming then the best option would be to use a so called manual flow control. You can find an example here.

Another interesting link is their official grpc-java benchmarks project, which is also used in the benchmark I've posted you.

Both JLink (gRPC#3522) and Graal have some issues; I'm especially concerned about the Serial GC in Graal so will be putting that under some stress soon to see if that confirms my suspicions. I'll also be good when some Java 16 JRE Alpine images appear as the JDK is too bloaty.