Hi, I'm not sure how this is related to using byte[] versus ByteBuffer. >
I'm sorry, I thought it was about making Map<byte[],byte[]> but not about byte[] vs ByteBuffer. > I would prefer avoid dealing with byte arrays at all and have an abstract >> pluggable serialization/desrialization which will use >> ObjectInput/ObjectOutput or something similar. >> > > At some point the data has to be stored to disk, and the question is > whether this should be done using a byte[] or a ByteBuffer. Files don't > support ObjectInput/ObjectOutput as far as I know. > Just a simple use case for better understanding. If I want to create storage over offheap memory I would prefer not to have any intermediate byte arrays or byte buffers but have an ability to serialize data to allocated memory region directly to avoid copying. So it would be great if serialization will be abstract enough to allow this. Byte array obviously is not abstract at all. Sergi -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "H2 Database" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/h2-database/-/YJ15ydfEgbgJ. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/h2-database?hl=en.
