[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-5264?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16833663#comment-16833663
 ] 

Jacques Nadeau commented on ARROW-5264:
---------------------------------------

This was done on purpose to ensure the JVM only has to optimize one versionĀ of 
the code, thus increasing the likelihood of JIT optimizations. I don't see a 
good reason to change this without proof of a similar optimization behavior 
with anĀ alternative approach.

> [Java] Allow enabling/disabling boundary checking dynamically in the code
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: ARROW-5264
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-5264
>             Project: Apache Arrow
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Java
>            Reporter: Liya Fan
>            Assignee: Liya Fan
>            Priority: Minor
>              Labels: pull-request-available
>         Attachments: screenshot-1.png
>
>          Time Spent: 10m
>  Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> The flag BoundsChecking#BOUNDS_CHECKING_ENABLED determines if boundary 
> checking is enabled/disabled in vector/arrow buffer APIs. 
> It has significant performance implications, since boundary checking is a 
> frequent operation.
> This issue address 2 problems with the flag for boundary checking in Java API:
> 1. This flag is final and initialized in a static block. That means, the only 
> reliable way to override it is in the JVM command line, by providing some 
> system properties. However, for some scenarios, it is difficult or even 
> impossible to get access to the JVM command line. Therefore, it is desirable 
> to provide a way to override it dynamically in the program code. 
> 2. There is an old and a new system property for this flag. To disable 
> boundary checking, both the old and new properties must be set to true, which 
> is undesirable:
>  !screenshot-1.png! 



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)

Reply via email to