-Re: update on dist exec work
Jacques Nadeau 2013-04-20, 05:03
> > Otherwise we have to encode and decode a buffer of length zero. If no
> > buffer is passed, we just drop that field all together. Also, I wasn't
> > thinking that the second submitQuery() exists. The goal of the buffer
> > field is to be able to keep data off heap. We probably shouldn't use
> > for for metadata (such as the query plan).
> - Not sure what you're saying… Are you suggesting that the query
> itself should be kept in RunQuery
Basically yes. I'd like to be strongly typed unless we're specifically
dealing with data we want to manage off heap. As such, I was thinking that
only record batches should be passed via the open ended bytebuf interface.
I see that you've made the other updates. I'll merge those into the
execwork wip branch.
Thanks for all your effort.