Hey guys:

Currently all the comments has been resolved and all the builds and tests are 
passed.

Is there any other general comments regarding this changes?

Yurui
On 21 May 2019, 10:36 AM +0800, Yurui Zhou <yurui....@alibaba-inc.com>, wrote:
> Hi Micah:
>
> Thanks for the response. According to our benchmark, the cpp-orc is on 
> average 1% to 10% slower than the java-orc,
> While the on-heap to off-heap memory conversion overhead can easily outweigh 
> such a performance difference.
> And we are currently also working on some performance improvement patches to 
> cpp-orc to make sure it achieve at least the same performance as java-orc.
>
> Thanks
> Yurui
> On 20 May 2019, 9:22 PM +0800, Micah Kornfield <emkornfi...@gmail.com>, wrote:
> > Hi Yurui,
> > This is cool, I will try to leave some comments tonight.
> >
> > Reading the JIRA it references the conversion from on-heap to off heap
> > memory being the performance issue. Now that Arrow Java can point at
> > arbitrary memory do you know the performance delta between java-orc and
> > cpp-orc? (I'm wondering if we should do something similar for parquet-cpp)
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Micah
> >
> > On Monday, May 20, 2019, Yurui Zhou <yurui....@alibaba-inc.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Guys:
> > >
> > > I just created a PR with WIP changes about adding JNI interface for
> > > reading orc files.
> > >
> > > All the major changes has been done and I would like some early feedback
> > > from the community.
> > >
> > > Feel free to take a look and leave your feedback.
> > > https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/4348
> > >
> > > Some clean up and unit tests will be added up in follow up iterations.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Yurui
> > >
> > >

Reply via email to