[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-1091?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15153181#comment-15153181
]
Josh Elser commented on CALCITE-1091:
-------------------------------------
bq. I don't think the NOTICE addition is required. I'd like to keep the NOTICE
file small, so let's omit it.
I have no problem dropping the "includes software ..", but I'm fairly certain
we would still need to mention the fact that it was copied. However, this might
be moot after I'm done with it (significant modifications on the original). I
think it's premature to worry too much about it until I'm settled on the final.
I'll touch on this again before merging.
bq. Surprised that CALCITE-1093 had any effect, given that the number of result
sets is typically very small, but whatever.
It might have been more just showing up in terms of frequency of method calls
rather than a big impact on total runtime, but just something nit-picky that
should help (even if extremely slightly).
I'll clean up all the nits too. I have some more changes incoming as well.
bq. A bit funny that UnsynchronizedBuffer.Writer allows a non-power-of-2
initially but thereafter forces to a power of 2.
Yeah, I need to give this one a much closer scrub. There was some other
"weirdness" that I noticed with it while working on the aforementioned addt'l
changes.
> Reduce Avatica RPC latency umbrella
> -----------------------------------
>
> Key: CALCITE-1091
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-1091
> Project: Calcite
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: avatica
> Reporter: Josh Elser
> Assignee: Josh Elser
> Fix For: next
>
>
> I've been spending a bit of time looking at performance improvements to
> Avatica with the restriction of reducing the latency of operations (ignoring
> performance gains through concurrency).
> I'll use this as an umbrella for the issues I've run into so far.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
