Mailing-List: contact dev-help@directory.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Apache Directory Developers List" <dev@directory.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of elecharny@gmail.com designates
 74.125.83.47 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <5215DD47.5070806@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2013 11:43:35 +0200
From: =?UTF-8?B?RW1tYW51ZWwgTMOpY2hhcm55?= <elecharny@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7;
 rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Apache Directory Developers List <dev@directory.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Strig vs Byte[] for values in the server : some new ideas
References: <5215D936.5080105@gmail.com>
 <CABzFU-eCJ_SWd4y1L7AZRirk5z8vzG7zgpr3eMawn+JNhQy3xg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CABzFU-eCJ_SWd4y1L7AZRirk5z8vzG7zgpr3eMawn+JNhQy3xg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Le 8/22/13 11:32 AM, Kiran Ayyagari a écrit :
> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 2:56 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny <elecharny@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Making the UpValue a byte[] will save us a lot of wasted CPU, and
>> probably a bit of space on disk, as a String requires 2 bytes per char
>> to be serialized.

even the byte[] will be of same size, I don't see where the gain is
am I missing something?


String are encoded using char[], and a char is 2 bytes. a UTF-8 encoded String will encode the chars on 1 to 6 bytes (well, 1 to 3 in real waorld), and for any char below 0x7F will be encoded as 1 byte.


-- 
Regards,
Cordialement,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com