Ivan, thankd for clarification. Binarilizable interface forces user to write serialization code. We can support this or similar interface. But I'd like Ignite has some default serializer in addition. It can be also useful e.g. in compute for param and result serialization.
BinaryObjectBuider requires an Ignite node for object construction, but we are looking for a detached builder and won't care about schemas. AFAIR, BinaryObject creates an objectReader on every single field read operation. So, BO solution produces a lot of garbage and BO has noticable overhead which affects the object footprint. чт, 17 июн. 2021 г., 21:41 Ivan Daschinsky <ivanda...@gmail.com>: > >> Double checked -- there is not any links to PR either in IEP or in jira > issue > Sorry, there is a link in IEP, but not in jira ticket. > > чт, 17 июн. 2021 г. в 21:39, Ivan Daschinsky <ivanda...@gmail.com>: > > > Andrey, > > >> arbitrary object graph > > Also, that is not true, msgpack format doesn't handle circular graphs. > > Think about msgpack as binary json. You couldn't understand full > structure > > of message if you didn't deserialize it fully before, maps and arrays are > > serialized just as contiguos chunks > > of values/kv-pairs. Msgpack is a really dumb and simple format. > > > > Also, as for me, I cannot understand why current ignite serialization > > (BinaryObjectBuilder or Binarilizable) is slower than raw message pack > > serializer. > > I suppose that this is an issue and we should investigate it. > > > > Pavel, why do you use PooledMessageBufferOutput in benchmarks? I'm > > sorry, but is it fair to use it? > > > > >> The code is linked in the IEP [2] > > Double checked -- there is not any links to PR either in IEP or in jira > > issue > > > > > -- > Sincerely yours, Ivan Daschinskiy >
