liyafan82 commented on pull request #7619: URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/7619#issuecomment-655232313
> Looks fine for the most part, but I'm not really sure why we need to separate `arrow-memory-core` and `arrow-memory-unsafe`? Couldn't those be combined since it wouldn't add any other dependencies, and that would also simplify things. Plus, it doesn't really make sense to have a module `arrow-memory-core` without a default allocator that would probably build fine with `arrow-vector`, but then blow up at runtime. What do you think @rymurr and @liyafan82 ? @BryanCutler I agree with you that it makes things simpler. Since we may need to continue to use netty implementation as the default one (as indicated by @jacques-n ), maybe it is beneficial to keep the arrow-memory-unsafe module, at least for now. ---------------------------------------------------------------- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
