[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-4375?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15381416#comment-15381416
]
Josh Elser commented on ACCUMULO-4375:
--------------------------------------
[~kturner], I'm going to go ahead with committing this one today, but I'd be
happy knowing you took a look when you next get a chance from an API
perspective. I feel like you always find the concerns with API-level changes
that I miss.
> Add missing Key constructors taking array of bytes as argument
> --------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: ACCUMULO-4375
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-4375
> Project: Accumulo
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: core
> Reporter: Mario Pastorelli
> Labels: newbie
> Time Spent: 2h 40m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> In my company we use {{Key}} built directly from {{byte[]}} instead of
> {{Text}}. Currently {{Key}} has many constructors working with {{Text}} and
> only few working with {{byte[]}}. You can still use the {{Text}}-based
> constructor to create a {{Key}} from a {{byte[]}} by wrapping it into a
> {{Text}}, but this requires to box a {{byte[]}} into {{Text}} without any
> good reason.
> I propose to add the missing {{byte[]}}-based {{Key}} constructors, which are:
> {code:java}
> Key(byte[] row)
> Key(byte[] row, long ts)
> Key(byte[] row, byte[] cf)
> Key(byte[] row, byte[] cf, byte[] cq)
> Key(byte[] row, byte[] cf, byte[] cq, byte[] cv)
> Key(byte[] row, byte[] cf, byte[] cq, long ts)
> Key(byte[] row, byte[] cf, byte[] cq, ColumnVisibility cv, long ts)
> {code}
> The new constructor should behave like the {{Text}}-based counterpart, for
> instance:
> {code:java}
> byte[] row = new byte[] {0};
> assertEquals(new Key(row), new Key(new Text(row)));
> {code}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
