lly written (serialized) as XxxBuffer. It could've been just a
> regular array. The actual type (e.g. byte[] or ByteBuffer) only matters
> during deserialization.
>
> Regards
> Andrey
>
> --
> *From:* Vladimir Ozerov
> *Sent:* Tuesday, November 7,
Looks like this issue would be linked too.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5602
--
Sent from: http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/
ich makes me wonder if the self imposed rules such as “type
>> system should be kept as small as possible” could be relaxed in the name of
>> greater good and user friendliness. Ignite API is not easy to grok as it is
>> already.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Andrey
>>
e name of
>> greater good and user friendliness. Ignite API is not easy to grok as it is
>> already.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Andrey
>> _________
>> From: Vladimir Ozerov mailto:voze...@gridgain.com>>
>> Sent: Monday, November 6, 2017 1
___
> > From: Valentin Kulichenko valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com>>
> > Sent: Monday, November 6, 2017 9:17 AM
> > To: dev@ignite.apache.org<mailto:dev@ignite.apache.org>
> > Subject: Re: Deserialization of BinaryObject's byte arrays
> >
>
Ozerov mailto:voze...@gridgain.com>>
Sent: Monday, November 6, 2017 10:22 PM
Subject: Re: Deserialization of BinaryObject's byte arrays
To: mailto:dev@ignite.apache.org>>
Cc: Valentin Kulichenko
mailto:valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com>>
Hi Andrey,
While we deifnitely need
2017 9:17 AM
> To: dev@ignite.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Deserialization of BinaryObject's byte arrays
>
> This use case was discussed couple of times already, so it seems to be
> pretty important for users. And I like the approach suggested by Andrey.
>
> Andrey, can you
Will do! Thanks!
From: Valentin Kulichenko
Sent: Monday, November 6, 2017 9:17 AM
To: dev@ignite.apache.org
Subject: Re: Deserialization of BinaryObject's byte arrays
This use case was discussed couple of times already, so it seems to be
pretty importan
This use case was discussed couple of times already, so it seems to be
pretty important for users. And I like the approach suggested by Andrey.
Andrey, can you create a Jira ticket for this change? Would you like to
contribute it?
-Val
On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 4:18 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan
wrote:
>
This makes sense to me. Sounds like a useful feature.
Would be nice to hear what others in the community think?
D.
On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 1:07 PM, Andrey Kornev
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We store lots of byte arrays (serialized graph-like data structures) as
> fields of BinaryObject. Later on, while
Hello,
We store lots of byte arrays (serialized graph-like data structures) as fields
of BinaryObject. Later on, while reading such field, BinaryInputStream
implementation creates an on-heap array and copies the bytes from the
BinaryObject's internal backing array to the new array.
While in ge
11 matches
Mail list logo
