I would agree that it should be on a user to always sort the fields, if we make it a part of the contract. However, in this case, we should always throw exception if user somehow provides fields in the wrong order.
D. On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 8:07 AM, Sergi Vladykin <[email protected]> wrote: > Could you please elaborate why would we want to sort fields in > Binarilyzable > classes? > > If you are taking from stable binary representation perspective, then I > think it is a problem of user, but not ours. > > Sergi > > 2017-04-10 17:53 GMT+03:00 Vladimir Ozerov <[email protected]>: > > > Zapalniki, > > > > Inspired by IGNITE-4669 (.NET: Sort binary object fields) [1]. > > > > Currently we sort binary object fields before when writing them to the > > output stream in case of standard (Serializable) objects and > > BinaryObjectBuilder. This makes sense as we have stable binary object > > representation irrespective of fields order, which is very important e.g. > > for DML. And it works fine from performance perspective as well: > > - For standard classes we sort fields only once during initialization; > > - For builder we have to maintain the whole object graph in memory before > > writing anyway as builder is mutable, so sorting doesn't impose serious > > performance hit. > > > > But what to do with Binarilyzable classes? We can sort their fields as > > well, but it means that: > > 1) We will not be able to write them directly to stream. Instead, we will > > accumulate values in memory, and write only when the whole object graph > is > > known. > > 2) Currently reads are mostly sequential from memory perspective. With > this > > change reads will become random. > > > > So we will loose both read and write serialization performance. How do > you > > think - do we need this change or not? > > > > Vladimir. > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-4669 > > >
