Hello!
I think you can have two long fields (hi, lo) and have index on (hi asc, lo
asc). Such index will be around 20 bytes/rec.
Actually this will only give you 127 bit fields if I'm not mistaken, since
perhaps you don't want to use negative lo values.
Regards,
--
Ilya Kasnacheev
пт, 28 июн.
The problem with BigInteger is it takes around 80 bytes. I will be having 2
BigInteger fields in my class which will take around 176 bytes per record.
I will be having around 40 to 60 million such entries in my cache.
So I am thinking to squeeze some bytes using two long numbers or using two
byte
Hi,
Theoretically, you can create an index and use >= and <= comparisons for
any data type. In your particular case, I think, using BigInteger is the
most straightforward approach.
Hope this helps.
On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 9:39 AM Prasad Bhalerao <
prasadbhalerao1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
Hi,
I want to store 128 bit number as a one the field in value object in my
cache.
I can do that using multiple ways.
e.g.
1) I can store 128 bit number using java.math.BigInteger.
a) But If store it using BigInteger, can I create index on this field?
b) How can I use this field in wh
