Re: Is there an easier way to wrap/unwrap the entire tuple as a ByteBuffer?

Note that this is the AsterixDB format, right? (Hyracks - at its level - doesn't dictate the contents' details AFAIK except for its built-in primitive types; the rest are black boxes and accessed by functions like comparators, etc.) On 4/10/18 5:36 PM, Taewoo Kim wrote: Hello Ahmed, This

Re: Is there an easier way to wrap/unwrap the entire tuple as a ByteBuffer?

Hello Ahmed, This doc might help. https://code.google.com/archive/p/asterixdb/wikis/Serialization.wiki Best, Taewoo On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 5:30 PM, Ahmed Eldawy wrote: > Mike, > > What you're suggesting makes more sense. We just don't know how to do it :) > BTW, is there any

Re: Is there an easier way to wrap/unwrap the entire tuple as a ByteBuffer?

Mike, What you're suggesting makes more sense. We just don't know how to do it :) BTW, is there any document that describes the binary format of the frame/tuple/fields? I was able to find out some information myself by digging into the code but if there is a document or page that describes this

Re: Is there an easier way to wrap/unwrap the entire tuple as a ByteBuffer?

Hi, You can try IFrameFieldAppender (and its implementation FrameFixedFieldAppender) to directly append wrapped tuple (field by field) to the output buffer, without going through the array tuple builder. But in general, because of the tuple format, I'm not sure there is a more efficient way to

Is there an easier way to wrap/unwrap the entire tuple as a ByteBuffer?

Hi Dev, I'm working on a Hyracks application for parallel random sampling which consists of two operators. The first operator generates and appends a new field to each tuple while the second operator processes that additional field and removes it before writing the final output. So, the output of