[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-14398?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14947347#comment-14947347
]
stack commented on HBASE-14398:
-------------------------------
I think 'Buffer' too generic. 'ByteBuffer' makes sense since that is what this
class is all about. Would getRow, getFamily without the BB be too radical? The
fact that we are doing these invocations on a class called BBC provides enough
'context' -- its a getRow against a BBC?
Man... back to getXXXOffset again. Sorry @anoop and [~ram_krish] -- but looking
at these offset methods in BBC is doing my head in.
OK on not doing an instance check when they call getXXXArray -- just do the
allocation and copy if its on offheap Cell.
But, if they call getXXXOffset and it is a BBC, why not give back the BB offset
always? If they use it against an array returned from getXXXArray, then let it
mess up... break.... IllegalArrayAccessException or whatever. getXXXOffset if
BBC should be for the BB... Let it break in CP and Filters, etc.. What you
think?
> Create the fake keys required in the scan path to avoid copy to byte[]
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-14398
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-14398
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Reporter: ramkrishna.s.vasudevan
> Assignee: ramkrishna.s.vasudevan
> Fix For: 2.0.0
>
> Attachments: HBASE-14398.patch, HBASE-14398_1.patch
>
>
> Already we have created some fake keys for the ByteBufferedCells so that we
> can avoid the copy requried to create fake keys. This JIRA aims to fill up
> all such places so that the Offheap BBs are not copied to onheap byte[].
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
