Naive (me as a stupid observer :-)) question:  Is there a reason to wrap/unwrap instead of extend/unextend? (I.e., couldn't you add an additional Hyracks tuple field and then project it away - i.e., expand and contract the tuple horizontally rather than nesting and unnesting it?)

On 4/10/18 11:10 AM, Chen Luo wrote:

You can try IFrameFieldAppender (and its implementation
FrameFixedFieldAppender) to directly append wrapped tuple (field by field)
to the output buffer, without going through the array tuple builder. But in
general, because of the tuple format, I'm not sure there is a more
efficient way to wrap/unwrap tuples directly.

Best regards,
Chen Luo

On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 10:33 AM, Muhammad Abu Bakar Siddique <> wrote:

Hi Dev,
I'm working on a Hyracks application for parallel random sampling which
consists of two operators. The first operator generates and appends a new
field to each tuple while the second operator processes that additional
field and removes it before writing the final output. So, the output of the
second operator should have the same format of the input of the first
operator. In other words, I want the first operator to wrap the tuple as-is
and add an additional field while the second operator should remove and
unwrap the tuple. Currently, I use the FrameTupleAppender and
ArrayTupleAppender where I have to add each field in the input record
separately but it seems to be an overhead in the code. Is there an easier
way to wrap/unwrap the entire tuple as a ByteBuffer without having to worry
about the individual fields inside it?

Reply via email to