[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8693?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13693214#comment-13693214
]
Nick Dimiduk commented on HBASE-8693:
-------------------------------------
bq. You kept the java name for all types, except BigDecimal, is there a reason?
The data types come from the (outdated) spec posted on HBASE-8089. I believe
there is value in choosing types that are meaningful in a SQL context, but we
shouldn't limit our thinking on this to what was laid down 30 years ago.
bq. Some unit tests could help to see how it should be used.
Agreed. Look for those in a followup patch.
bq. For example, the constructors are private...
The idea is instances of {{HDataType}} are type definitions, not data values.
For instance, the {{o.a.h.h.t.Decimal#DECIMAL}} instance is the definition of
how to encode,decode values and how values of this type relate to values of
other types. It does not represent a numeric value.
> Implement extensible type API based on serialization primitives
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-8693
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8693
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: Client
> Reporter: Nick Dimiduk
> Assignee: Nick Dimiduk
> Fix For: 0.95.2
>
> Attachments: 0001-HBASE-8693-Extensible-data-types-API.patch
>
>
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
