[GitHub] [arrow] jacques-n commented on pull request #7619: ARROW-9300: [Java] Separate Netty Memory to its own module

[GitBox <gi...@apache.org>]

jacques-n commented on pull request #7619:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/7619#issuecomment-655210526


   > Looks fine for the most part, but I'm not really sure why we need to separate `arrow-memory-core` and `arrow-memory-unsafe`? Couldn't those be combined since it wouldn't add any other dependencies, and that would also simplify things. Plus, it doesn't really make sense to have a module `arrow-memory-core` without a default allocator that would probably build fine with `arrow-vector`, but then blow up at runtime. What do you think @rymurr and @liyafan82 ?
   
   This is modeled after the slf4j pattern where the logging implementation is separated from the core apis. That way the default pattern can people sourcing the desired allocator via dependency without having to configure one. This seems much cleaner that the previous approaches where people had to manually configure or override via system properties. 
   
   Additionally, I'd add that for new users I think we would suggest using the Netty one, not the unsafe one. It is much more complete/comprehensive and intelligent. So having a default implementation that we always tell people to override seems worse than they having a hard failure if they don't source any. If we want to make things easier, we could also introduce some vector + allocator depedency poms and then use those in documentation, etc.


----------------------------------------------------------------
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.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org