[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10771?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13951143#comment-13951143
]
Nick Dimiduk commented on HBASE-10771:
--------------------------------------
IMO, we're better off making use of an upstream project's types than
reinventing our own. We'll enjoy better compatibility with ecosystem tools.
Trouble is, ByteBuffer is inflexible and we haven't a concensus on adopting
Netty.
The primary concerns of ByteRange are: reusable instances within a tight loop
of compactions, simple(r) interface -- something I myself violated in
introducing PositionedByteRange, and more relevant comparable implementation.
Can we not resolve these difficulties using subclasses, helper/utility methods,
and/or reflection?
> Primitive type put/get APIs in ByteRange
> -----------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-10771
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10771
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Anoop Sam John
> Assignee: Anoop Sam John
> Fix For: 0.99.0
>
> Attachments: HBASE-10771.patch, HBASE-10771_V2.patch
>
>
> While doing HBASE-10713 I came across the need to write int/long (and read
> also) from a ByteRange. CellBlocks are backed by ByteRange. So we can add
> such APIs.
> Also as per HBASE-10750 we return a ByteRange from MSLAB and also discussion
> under HBASE-10191 suggest we can have BR backed HFileBlocks etc.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
