Hi,

Has something newsworthy happened on this?  :)

Best regards,
  -Stefán


On Friday, 18 April 2014 13:57:07 UTC, Lvc@ wrote:
>
>
>>  Slightly different issue I think.  I wasn't clear I was actually talking 
>> versioning of individual class schemas rather than global schema version.  
>> This is the part that allows to modify schema and (in some cases) avoid 
>> having to scan/rewrite all records in the class.  Although this is a nice 
>> feature to have it's really quite a seperate problem from binary 
>> serialization so I decided to treat them as seperate issues since trying to 
>> deal with both at once was really bogging me down.   Looking at your issue 
>> though I'd note that my subsclasses of OClassImpl and OPropertyImpl are 
>> actually immutable once constructed so this might help the schema-wide 
>> immutability.
>>
>
> Good, this would simplify that issue.
>  
>
>>  Also realised that per record compression will be rather easy to do... 
>>> But that's in the extras bucket so will leave that as a bonus prize once 
>>> the core functions are sorted and stable.
>>>
>>
>>  We already have per record compression, what do you mean? 
>>   
>>
>> I wasn't aware of this.  Perhaps this occurs in the Raw database layer of 
>> the code?  I haven't come across any compression code.  If you already have 
>> per record compression does this negate any potential value to per field 
>> compression?  i.e. if (string.length > 1000) compressString()
>>
>
> We compress at storage level, but always, not with a threshold. This 
> brings to no compression benefits in case of small records, so compression 
> at marshalling time would be preferable: drivers could send compressed 
> records to improve network I/O.
>
> Lvc@
>
>  
>

-- 

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"OrientDB" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to