YutSean commented on pull request #3940:
URL: https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/3940#issuecomment-999979380


   > Improvements to this code path are welcome! Thank you for putting together 
the jmh benchmark. For context, know that the original implementation was 
ported more-or-less directly from sqlite.
   > 
   > At this point, the code is rather opaque to me. Is it the case that the 
new encoder is forward and backward compatible with the previous 
implementation? That is, can a byte[] written by the new encoder be read 
correctly by the old implementation? Can a byte[] written by the old 
implementation be read correctly by the new?
   > 
   > Thanks.
   
   Yes. The new one is compatible with the previous implementation.  The new 
encoder just optimized the performance but not changed the encoding logic and 
this commit only made changes at the encoding part. The old read function can 
correctly read the bytes encoded by the new encoding in our UTs. Besides, I 
also randomly generated 200 examples to check the correctness. The results of 
the both encoding are matched.


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]


Reply via email to