[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-2817?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14326070#comment-14326070
]
Keith Turner commented on ACCUMULO-2817:
----------------------------------------
All of the new methods should have {{@since 1.7.0}} tags.
Ideally the new {{decode(byte[] b, int offset, int len)}} method would be added
to the {{Lexicode}} interface. However adding a method to that interface would
break any existing code outside of Accumulo that extended the interface. Java
8 provides a way around this w/ [Default
Methods|http://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/java/IandI/defaultmethods.html],
but can not use that currently. What about creating two tickets for the
future? One to switch Accumulo to Java 8 and one to add a method to the
interface that depends on the JAva 8 issue.
Once the {{decode(byte[] b, int offset, int len)}} is in the interface, then
{{ListLexicoder.decode()}} and {{PairLexicoder.decode()}} could possibly be
optimized to call the new {{decode()}} method and avoid copies. That could be
another follow on issue.
> Add offset and limit arguments to byte array Encoder.decode method
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: ACCUMULO-2817
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-2817
> Project: Accumulo
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: client
> Affects Versions: 1.7.0
> Reporter: Josh Elser
> Assignee: Matt Dailey
> Labels: newbie
> Fix For: 1.7.0
>
> Attachments: ACCUMULO-2817.patch
>
>
> Similar to ACCUMULO-2445, but presently the encoder only works on complete
> byte arrays. This forces an extra copy of the data when it is located in an
> array that contains other information (e.g. a composite key).
> It would be nice to be able to provide offset and length arguments to
> {{Encoder.decode}} so that users can avoid the additional arraycopy.
> Changing to a ByteBuffer instead of byte array argument would also be
> acceptable, but more churn on the API that, unless it's happening globally, I
> would rather avoid. It would also incur the penalty for that extra Object,
> which while minimal alone, could be significant if decoding every value in a
> table, for example.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
