Ticket created: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4611
Linked to the "Apache Ignite 2.0 quick and needed tasks" https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4547 On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 11:27 AM, Pavel Tupitsyn <ptupit...@apache.org> wrote: > Val, > > Not sure about UUID. > It is a very common thing and writing it as an object will introduce a lot > of overhead (17 bytes now vs 40+ bytes for object). > > May be we should even add a special case for IgniteUuid? > > On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 1:52 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org> > wrote: > >> Why not add IgniteUuid to BinaryContext.BINARYLIZABLE_SYS_CLSS? >> >> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 10:55 AM, Valentin Kulichenko < >> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > I actually think that both UUID and IgniteUuid should be plain >> serializable >> > classes, I don't see any reason for special processing for them. >> > >> > Currently we have the following: >> > >> > - UUID is Serializable, but we have special serialization logic for >> it >> > internally in the marshaller. >> > - IgniteUuid is Externalizable. >> > >> > This is indeed inconsistent and confusing. >> > >> > -Val >> > >> > On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 9:21 AM, Pavel Tupitsyn <ptupit...@apache.org> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > Igniters, >> > > >> > > Currently IgniteUuid is written with OptimizedMarshaller >> > > (it is not included in BinaryContext.BINARYLIZABLE_SYS_CLSS). >> > > >> > > This prevents it from being read on other platforms (.NET, C++). >> > > >> > > Is there any reason for this? Can we fix this in 2.0? >> > > >> > > Thanks, >> > > Pavel >> > > >> > >> > >
