[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-13510?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14541281#comment-14541281
]
Anoop Sam John commented on HBASE-13510:
----------------------------------------
bq.This is fine I think. I would leave it as a method only for readability.
Why I say is, you dont need any null check on family and all... IMO create
directly at the used places (2) gives better readability.
Later in the patch I got why u have KeyValue instead of Cell. Can this
interface method take byte[] only? May be byte[] offset and length 3 params.?
Within a bloom interface byte[] based API will look cleaner IMO
> Purge ByteBloomFilter
> ---------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-13510
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-13510
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Reporter: ramkrishna.s.vasudevan
> Assignee: ramkrishna.s.vasudevan
> Fix For: 2.0.0
>
> Attachments: HBASE-13510_1.patch, HBASE-13510_2.patch,
> HBASE-13510_3.patch
>
>
> In order to address the comments over in HBASE-10800 related to comparing
> Cell with a serialized KV's key we had some need for that in Bloom filters.
> After discussing with Anoop, we found that it may be possible to
> remove/modify some of the APIs in the BloomFilter interfaces and for doing
> that we can purge ByteBloomFilter.
> I read the code and found that ByteBloomFilter was getting used in V1 version
> only. Now as it is obsolete we can remove this code and move some of the
> static APIs in ByteBloomFilter to some other util class or bloom related
> classes which will help us in refactoring the code too.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
