Inline
On Sun, Apr 8, 2018 at 10:04 AM, Vlad Rozov wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> My comments in-line.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Vlad
>
> On 4/5/18 20:50, Paul Rogers wrote:
>
>> Hi Vlad,
>>
>>> I'd suggest to keep focus on DrillBuf design and implementation as the
>>> only gate for accessing raw (direct) mem
Hi Vlad,
Thanks for the clarifications. My general comment is that it is always good to
refactor things if that is the fastest way to achieve some goal. It is not
clear, however, what the goal is here other than code improvement. Since Drill
still has plenty of opportunities for improvement tha
Hi Paul,
My comments in-line.
Thank you,
Vlad
On 4/5/18 20:50, Paul Rogers wrote:
Hi Vlad,
I'd suggest to keep focus on DrillBuf design and implementation as the only
gate for accessing raw (direct) memory.
I was doing that. By explaining where DrillBuf fits in the overall design, we
se
Hi Vlad,
> I'd suggest to keep focus on DrillBuf design and implementation as the only
> gate for accessing raw (direct) memory.
I was doing that. By explaining where DrillBuf fits in the overall design, we
see that DrillBuf should be the only access point for direct memory. The
context explai
Hi Paul,
Thank you, it is good to have a different angle view on Vectors,
Operators and Batches. For this thread, I'd suggest to keep focus on
DrillBuf design and implementation as the only gate for accessing raw
(direct) memory. It will be good for the community to agree on
1. Boundary chec
Hi Vlad,
Would be great to get insight from the original authors. Here ismy two cents as
a late comer who made extensive use of the classes in question.
Many of your questions are at the implementation level. It is worth looking at
the question from two other perspectives: history and design.
