[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-6936?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14305383#comment-14305383
]
Aleksey Yeschenko commented on CASSANDRA-6936:
----------------------------------------------
bq. Timestamp reconciliation isn't as much of a problem
I was talking about a more esoteric thing - Cell#reconcile() when the
timestamps are equal. Using BB.compareTo() on the value. Need to have the exact
same representation as we have now, there.
> Make all byte representations of types comparable by their unsigned byte
> representation only
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-6936
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-6936
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Core
> Reporter: Benedict
> Labels: performance
> Fix For: 3.0
>
>
> This could be a painful change, but is necessary for implementing a
> trie-based index, and settling for less would be suboptimal; it also should
> make comparisons cheaper all-round, and since comparison operations are
> pretty much the majority of C*'s business, this should be easily felt (see
> CASSANDRA-6553 and CASSANDRA-6934 for an example of some minor changes with
> major performance impacts). No copying/special casing/slicing should mean
> fewer opportunities to introduce performance regressions as well.
> Since I have slated for 3.0 a lot of non-backwards-compatible sstable
> changes, hopefully this shouldn't be too much more of a burden.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
