[jira] [Comment Edited] (ACCUMULO-2817) Add offset and limit arguments to byte array Encoder.decode method

["Keith Turner (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-2817?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14326116#comment-14326116 ] 

Keith Turner edited comment on ACCUMULO-2817 at 2/18/15 4:17 PM:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

[~elserj] I missed that { V decode(byte[] b, int offset, int len)}} was added to {{TypedValueCombiner}} in the patch.   I was thinking the new decode method was just added to the existing implementations.   We can not add that method to the interface in 1.7.0 w/o possibly breaking user implementations of Lexicoder.


was (Author: kturner):
[~elserj] I missed that {{ V decode(byte[] b, int offset, int len)}} was added to {{TypedValueCombiner}} in the patch.   I was thinking the new decode method was just added to the existing implementations.   We can not add that method to the interface in 1.7.0 w/o possibly breaking user implementations of Lexicoder.

> Add offset and limit arguments to byte array Encoder.decode method
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: ACCUMULO-2817
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-2817
>             Project: Accumulo
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: client
>    Affects Versions: 1.7.0
>            Reporter: Josh Elser
>            Assignee: Matt Dailey
>              Labels: newbie
>             Fix For: 1.7.0
>
>         Attachments: ACCUMULO-2817.patch
>
>
> Similar to ACCUMULO-2445, but presently the encoder only works on complete byte arrays. This forces an extra copy of the data when it is located in an array that contains other information (e.g. a composite key).
> It would be nice to be able to provide offset and length arguments to {{Encoder.decode}} so that users can avoid the additional arraycopy.
> Changing to a ByteBuffer instead of byte array argument would also be acceptable, but more churn on the API that, unless it's happening globally, I would rather avoid. It would also incur the penalty for that extra Object, which while minimal alone, could be significant if decoding every value in a table, for example.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)