ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Non-UTF-8 string encoding support in BinaryMarshaller (IGNITE-5655)
Date Tue, 25 Jul 2017 17:23:06 GMT
I don't understand why this encoding is done on per-object and not on
per-cache level. Shouldn't the column-to-encoding mapping be defined at
cache level configuration?

On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 12:13 PM, Vladimir Ozerov <vozerov@gridgain.com>
wrote:

> Andrey,
>
> You cannot have optional part in the middle as it will break compatibility
> in dangerous way, probably leading to node crash. Also having INT (4 bytes)
> looks too much for me.
>
> Instead, I would add new type "encoded string":
> 1 byte - type
> 1 byte - encoding code, map frequently used encodings to some byte value;
> also have a special value, meaning that encoding will be written as string
> afterwards, this way we will support any encoding out of the box
> [optional] encoding name
> 4 bytes - string length
> Finally - string bytes
>
> Vladimir.
>
> вт, 25 июля 2017 г. в 18:24, Andrey Kuznetsov <stkuzma@gmail.com>:
>
> > I apologize for damaged formatting. Below is my message as it should be.
> >
> >
> > Hi Igniters,
> >
> > I'd like to discuss future changes related to https://issues.apache.org/
> > jira/browse/IGNITE-5655
> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5655>.
> >
> > Is it really good idea to introduce new flag (ENCODED_STRING) for
> existing
> > String datatype? It's possible to use existing STRING flag at negligible
> > performance cost.
> >
> > Currently, utf-8-encoded string looks like
> >
> > byteFlag nonNegativeIntStrLen bytes
> >
> > This format can be backward compatibly extended to
> >
> > byteFlag [negativeIntCharsetCode] nonNegativeIntStrLen bytes
> >
> > Next, I suggest to add new BinaryConfiguration property for encoding to
> use
> > instead of using global property. It seems to be more convenient for
> user.
> >
> > I'll appreciate your feedback.
> >
> > 2017-07-25 16:13 GMT+03:00 Andrey Kuznetsov <stkuzma@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > Hi Igniters,I'd like to discuss future changes related to  IGNITE-5655
> > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5655>  . Is it really
> good
> > > idea to introduce new flag (ENCODED_STRING) for existing String
> datatype?
> > > It's possible to use existing STRING flag at negligible performance
> cost.
> > > Currently, utf-8-encoded string looks like
> > > byteFlag nonNegativeIntStrLen bytes
> > > This format can be backward compatibly extended to
> > > byteFlag [negativeIntCharsetCode] nonNegativeIntStrLen bytes
> > > Next, I suggest to add new BinaryConfiguration property for encoding to
> > use
> > > instead of using global property. It seems to be more convenient for
> > > user.I'll appreciate your feedback.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----
> > > Best regards,
> > >   Andrey Kuznetsov.
> > > --
> > > View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-
> > > developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Non-UTF-8-string-encoding-
> > > support-in-BinaryMarshaller-IGNITE-5655-tp20024.html
> > > Sent from the Apache Ignite Developers mailing list archive at
> > Nabble.com.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> >   Andrey Kuznetsov.
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message