Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
feat(collections): Multi RefKeys method and reverse Triple iterator support #21496
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
feat(collections): Multi RefKeys method and reverse Triple iterator support #21496
Changes from 8 commits
e241646
564cc8e
af2f94c
e1a1811
1b1d1a7
bc0f060
3d5e125
7e970f2
c04262d
ab38ee4
855d950
f74d090
7fb9afc
d3437ca
a723a09
a56e943
551ed34
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
i think we should RawIterate getting bytes, then use the bytes as map index. (can be efficiently done with unsafe)
then convert them to the real type later using the key codec
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
not sure I follow.
IterateRaw
uses an untyped range but returns a typed iterator. So we're not getting bytes out of it. Can you write a small pseudo code of what you meant? (or explain in other words?) @testinginprodThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@julienrbrt any chance you get what he meant?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Not really. @testinginprod care to ellaborate?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@testinginprod trying again...
The work is almost done, I would really like see this code merged, and it's stuck for some time (@julienrbrt)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sorry for being slow!
So:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Also maybe to fast track merging, we could split the PR in two,and push the multi refkeys method to another PR since it is more contentious than the triple reverse range
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
now comparing bytes for equality and not using reflect :) @testinginprod
Hope it's ok, see here: oren-lava@a56e943