dlmarion commented on PR #4206:
URL: https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/4206#issuecomment-1919564002

   
   > * Should we deprecate ColumnVisibility.quote()?  There are two instances 
of that method (one for string and one for byte[]).  This branch deprecates one 
of those.  When I merged I removed the single deprecation and threw in a TODO.  
If we want to deprecate, thinking we should do both or neither.
   
   I made a comment in apache/accumulo#3746 about this
   
   > * This branch had ColumnVis wrap and AccessExpression.  In [updates column 
visibility to use accumulo access library 
#3746](https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/3746) ColVis was still wrapping 
a byte array instead of an AccessExpress.  I kept the byte[] to avoid going 
from byte[]->String->byte[] in some cases.  Also avoid an extra object 
allocation in some cases.  However I am not sure about this.  Wrapping the 
AccessExpression seems cleaner, but may be inefficient in some circumstances w/ 
more copies and object allocations.
   
   I liked the simplicity of ColVis wrapping AccessExpression. The 
VisibilityEvaluator is changing to use AccessEvaluator, so the byte[] in ColVis 
*must* be a valid AccessExpression. In ColVis(byte[]) constructor, you are 
calling `AccessExpression.validate`, so I'm not sure that you are saving much 
w/r/t object creation. I wonder if the answer is for ColVis to have 
`AccessExpression` and `byte[]` members that are set in the constructor to 
avoid the runtime cost of calling `AccessExpression.getExpression`.
   
   > * The existing changes in [updates column visibility to use accumulo 
access library #3746](https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/3746) did not 
need to add a new List<byte[]> constructor to AccessEvaluator, so I kept those. 
 So if we want to keep those, then may not need to add that method in 
accumulo-access.
   
   Fine by me, whatever works.
   
   


-- 
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