On Sep 9, 2014, at 3:14 PM, <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
So I'm running into issues with binary data, I'm storing byte arrays and the client is being too smart and getting it wrong, sometimes thinking it's a string or gzip content. I think with 2.0, you'd be best off using the legacy transcoder and setting the compression threshold quite high. That shouldn't cause an issue with "too smart" though, so we probably have a bug. Can you file one at couchbase.com/issues<http://couchbase.com/issues> with a simple test case by chance? That'd be a great help. Also worth trying is the master branch since some fixes have gone in-- assuming you're comfortable building this yourself. The use case is that I'm dealing with protocol buffer messages. I'd rather not gzip them that's just extra cpu for no reason that I need. What is the best way to handle this? Chris On Tuesday, September 9, 2014 10:52:43 AM UTC-7, [email protected]<http://ochsnet.com> wrote: Is LegacyDocument the best way to handle binary values in the new java SDK? It appears to work fine, and I didn't see any other way to handle it. Chris -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Couchbase" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- Matt Ingenthron Couchbase, Inc. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Couchbase" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
