On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 3:40 AM, Vyacheslav Daradur <daradu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Encoding must be set on per field basis. This will give us as most > flexible > > solution at the cost of 1-byte overhead. > > > Vova, I agree that the encoding should be set on per-field basis, but at > > the table level, not at a cell level. > > Dmitriy, Vladimir, > Let's use both approaches :-) > We can add parameter to CacheConfiguration. > If parameter specifie to use cache level encoding then marshaller will use > encoding in a cache, > otherwise marshaller will use per-field encoding. > Of course only if it doesn't complicate the solution. > > I think that it will complicate the solution and will complicate the marshalling protocol. The advantage of specifying the encoding at table/cache level is that we don't need to add extra encoding bytes to the marshalling protocol. I think Vova was suggesting encoding at the cell level, not at the field level, which seems to be redundant to me. Vova, do you agree?
