On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 6:37 PM, Jake Mannix <jake.man...@gmail.com> wrote: > Why would the sparse representation be the only way to represent it > on disk? It's nearly twice as big as the dense form for dense vectors > (ok, 50% bigger).
On disk (well, in any serialized form) you just have key-value, key-value pairs in sequence, right? Access time is irrelevant, so this representation is most space-efficient. Why's it bigger? > Where do we actually use the VectorWritable.readVector() static > method? Looks like it's used in about 16 places across the code. > If you stick to using VectorWritable as people use other writables > (just instantiate, then read()), this doesn't come up, the static > class instance isn't used... Yah this would be the same thing, if the static fields went away. Ergo, I think this method should just delegate to the constructor. Or go away entirely. Thoughts?
