Details

    • Type: Improvement Improvement
    • Status: Resolved
    • Priority: Major Major
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Affects Version/s: None
    • Fix Version/s: 0.20.1
    • Component/s: None
    • Labels:
      None

      Description

      Do we need a server-side and client-side version of KeyValue?

      One of the lads here was trying to write client-side code and got put off by javadoc that said "do not use this" (he wanted to getValue and didn't know ahead of time what columns the Result contained). This would seem to say we need javadoc for server-side and then different javadoc for client-side.

      Holstad wants KV to be comparable. We can't make KV comparable because at least on server-side, comparator to use changes with context. If there was a server-side KV, then we could make that comparable and leave the server-side KV alone.

        Activity

        Hide
        Erik Holstad added a comment -

        I regards to making KeyValue comparable, this was to integrate nicely with Cascading. I talked to Chris about this and proposed that the Cascading Tuple would take an Object and a Comparator, so that any object could be put in there without making them all comparable. According to Chris this seems to be happening and if it does we don't need it to be comparable any longer.

        Will know more on Saturday.

        Show
        Erik Holstad added a comment - I regards to making KeyValue comparable, this was to integrate nicely with Cascading. I talked to Chris about this and proposed that the Cascading Tuple would take an Object and a Comparator, so that any object could be put in there without making them all comparable. According to Chris this seems to be happening and if it does we don't need it to be comparable any longer. Will know more on Saturday.
        Hide
        stack added a comment -

        @Erik Thanks. Good to hear. Then, its just case of javadoc. We should make it digestible for client-side users rather than cognescenti, the server-writers. Then I'd close this issue.

        Show
        stack added a comment - @Erik Thanks. Good to hear. Then, its just case of javadoc. We should make it digestible for client-side users rather than cognescenti, the server-writers. Then I'd close this issue.
        Hide
        stack added a comment -

        Simple (javadoc), necessary fix.

        Show
        stack added a comment - Simple (javadoc), necessary fix.
        Hide
        stack added a comment -

        Small change. All other public-facing methods used client side had nice javadoc that differentiated used client-side vs server-side. Just getValue was missing it. Appled branch and trunk.

        Show
        stack added a comment - Small change. All other public-facing methods used client side had nice javadoc that differentiated used client-side vs server-side. Just getValue was missing it. Appled branch and trunk.

          People

          • Assignee:
            stack
            Reporter:
            stack
          • Votes:
            0 Vote for this issue
            Watchers:
            0 Start watching this issue

            Dates

            • Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved:

              Development