Uhm... Ok.
Silly question. How do you plan on enforcing data types within the engine? I did a quick read of the Jira, and there is a question of design philosophy that should be discussed. On Aug 1, 2013, at 10:57 PM, Matt Corgan <[email protected]> wrote: > Looks great to me. Without the strict dependencies on hadoop or hbase > it'll be easy to pull into its own standalone module or new project if > there's demand. > > > On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 6:30 PM, Nick Dimiduk <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Finally-for-real-this-time patches posted. I'll take your +1's any time now >> ;) >> >> Thanks, >> Nick >> >> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 11:27 AM, Nick Dimiduk <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi everyone, >>> >>> As of yesterday, I've posted "final" patched on both HBASE-8201< >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8201>and >>> HBASE-8693 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8693>. The >> former >>> specifies on-disk format and the latter is the user-facing API. If you've >>> already left me a review, thank you; please have another look at these >>> patches. If you have an opinion here and haven't voiced it, we're >>> approaching the "forever hold your peace" part of the ceremony. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Nick >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 9:33 AM, Nick Dimiduk <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>>> Thanks for having a look. If you don't mind terribly, I responded to >> your >>>> comments on JIRA [0]. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Nick >>>> >>>> [0]: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8693#comment-13711250 >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 1:42 AM, Matteo Bertozzi < >> [email protected] >>>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I was looking at the HBASE-8693 patch, and looks good to me for the >>>>> primitive types. >>>>> but I can't see how do you plan to evolve stuff like the struct. >>>>> By "evolve" I mean add/remove fields, or just query it with a subset of >>>>> fields. >>>>> the fields don't have an id, and on read you must specify all of them >> in >>>>> the same order as you've used for write. >>>>> (but maybe is just an immutable/fixed list of fields, and I'm ok with >>>>> just >>>>> adding that info to the comment on top of the class) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Matteo >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 12:39 AM, Nick Dimiduk <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> New patch posted. What do you think about the new isSkippable() and >> the >>>>>> associated limitation in Struct? >>>>>> >>>>>> I also posted some "dogfeed" per Enis's suggestion. >>>>>> >>>>>> -n >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 1:38 PM, Stack <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Enis Söztutar <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Did some chatting with Nick today. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I think it is really important to get this right, and for that we >>>>> would >>>>>>>> definitely need more eyes towards it. The current patch set is >> in a >>>>>> good >>>>>>>> state to bolster the discussion. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'll do another pass (Kicking others to give it a looksee too). >>>>>>> St.Ack >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>
