[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-18519?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16141982#comment-16141982
]
stack commented on HBASE-18519:
-------------------------------
This issue has the totally wrong name. Should be add CellBuilder and it should
be stamped with usability/operability. This work is great.
On the cellbuilderfactory, when we have different Cell implementations -- i.e.
Cells that are other than KVs -- how would I swap the factory? Currently create
is a static. Should factory take a Configuration in constructor? Factory could
have a default implementation? Not trying to complicate. Can do this at a later
time. Just wanting to keep open the possibility of slotting in a new Cell type
easily enough.
I like the CellBuilderType w/ its shallow vs deep flag. Thats great.
What we thinking for ByteBufferCell type. Its internal I suppose. Don't have to
worry about it for a while?
[~anoop.hbase] and [~ram_krish]... come look at this nice patch
> Substitute IndividualBytesFieldCell for CellUtil.createCell
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-18519
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-18519
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Chia-Ping Tsai
> Assignee: Chia-Ping Tsai
> Fix For: 2.0.0
>
> Attachments: HBASE-18519.v0.patch, HBASE-18519.v1.patch,
> HBASE-18519.v2.patch
>
>
> The IndividualBytesFieldCell, which is introduced by HBASE-14882, carries the
> input arguments without copying. We can substitute IndividualBytesFieldCell
> for CellUtil.createCell.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
