[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SAMZA-256?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14057884#comment-14057884
 ] 

Chris Riccomini commented on SAMZA-256:
---------------------------------------

bq. I actually like samza-kv to be a separate module - given that there's 
plenty more refactoring coming up (getStorageEngine API).

Cool, works for me.

Could you post updated patch here? Posting on JIRA is what assigns rights to 
Apache (as opposed to RB). I know it's annoying to do both, sorry.

> Provide in-memory data store implementation
> -------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SAMZA-256
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SAMZA-256
>             Project: Samza
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: kv
>    Affects Versions: 0.6.0
>            Reporter: Jakob Homan
>            Assignee: Chinmay Soman
>             Fix For: 0.8.0
>
>         Attachments: samza_256.patch, samza_256_1.patch
>
>
> The sole current kv store, LevelDbKeyValueStore, works well when the amount 
> of data to be stored is prohibitively large to keep it all in memory.  
> However, in cases where the state is small enough to comfortably fit in 
> whatever memory is available, it would be better to provide an in-memory 
> implementation.  This can be backed by either a native Java class, or perhaps 
> a Guava class, if that is found to scale better (or, of course, the backing 
> implementation could be configurable).



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)

Reply via email to