[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-15393?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17185997#comment-17185997
]
Michael Semb Wever commented on CASSANDRA-15393:
------------------------------------------------
{quote}Is there's a big difference between allowing performance improvements,
especially ones that address real operational problems, into {{beta}} vs.
{{4.0.x?}}
{quote}
The choice isn't binary, 4.1 is more appropriate. Was just my way of stating my
concerns about this going into 4.0-beta when so much effort has been put into
the feature freeze. 4.0.x would still require a waiver IMO, but with the
QA/testing lifecycle guidelines from 4.0-beta better landed, and the stress and
anxiety of getting 4.0 out after so long, it may then be a much easier
discussion to have.
Again, can we please take this to the ML, and leave the ticket for the
technical?
> Add byte array backed cells
> ---------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-15393
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-15393
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: Local/Compaction
> Reporter: Blake Eggleston
> Assignee: Blake Eggleston
> Priority: Normal
> Fix For: 4.0-beta
>
> Time Spent: 20m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> We currently materialize all values as on heap byte buffers. Byte buffers
> have a fairly high overhead given how frequently they’re used, and on the
> compaction and local read path we don’t do anything that needs them. Use of
> byte buffer methods only happens on the coordinator. Using cells that are
> backed by byte arrays instead in these situations reduces compaction and read
> garbage up to 22% in many cases.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commits-h...@cassandra.apache.org
