Makes sense – I suspect what you suggested should work. However, I think the overhead between this and using `String` would be similar enough to warrant just using `String`.
Mark From: Sonal Goyal [mailto:sonalgoy...@gmail.com] Sent: June-11-15 12:58 PM To: Mark Tse Cc: user@spark.apache.org Subject: Re: ReduceByKey with a byte array as the key I think if you wrap the byte[] into an object and implement equals and hashcode methods, you may be able to do this. There will be the overhead of extra object, but conceptually it should work unless I am missing something. Best Regards, Sonal Founder, Nube Technologies<http://www.nubetech.co> Check out Reifier at Spark Summit 2015<https://spark-summit.org/2015/events/real-time-fuzzy-matching-with-spark-and-elastic-search/> On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 9:27 PM, Mark Tse <mark....@d2l.com<mailto:mark....@d2l.com>> wrote: I would like to work with RDD pairs of Tuple2<byte[], obj>, but byte[]s with the same contents are considered as different values because their reference values are different. I didn't see any to pass in a custom comparer. I could convert the byte[] into a String with an explicit charset, but I'm wondering if there's a more efficient way. Also posted on SO: http://stackoverflow.com/q/30785615/2687324 Thanks, Mark
