Java Client Riak Builders...
lic_gma at hotmail.com
Tue May 29 15:07:08 EDT 2012
Also, the coming riak client version removed the embedded json package from
it and put an old implementation from the main maven repo, I think that what
was meant to do was to put this version:
https://github.com/douglascrockford/JSON-java which has lot of performance
improvements but no maven repo, the old:
uses lot of StringBuffer instead of StringBuilders and StringWritters
introduced later on.
I'm wondering about the benchmark of one vs the other.
From: Brian Roach
Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 7:05 PM
To: Guido Medina
Cc: riak-users at lists.basho.com
Subject: Re: Java Client Riak Builders...
Thanks, looking forward to it.
Also as an FYI, on Friday I fixed the bug that was causing the requirement
of the @JsonIgnore for Riak annotated fields without getters.
- Brian Roach
On May 29, 2012, at 11:52 AM, Guido Medina wrote:
> I will request a "pull request", I fixed it, I enabled @RiakIndex for
> collection fields AND methods (String, Integer or Collection of any of
> those), on our coding is working, but still I need to test it more before
> making it final.
> I will share the details tomorrow, I already created a fork from your
> master branch.
> Now you can have something like:
> Collection<Integer> getNumbers()
> Also this works as index and with no getter (as of 1.0.6-SNAPSHOT) will
> only be that, an index:
> Collection<String> numbers;
> That will act as index and be ignored as property which is the intention
> of the index, to be a dynamic calculated value(s) and not as property
> which requires the caller to call a post-construct.
> And of course, all subclasses of a collection apply.
> Thanks for the answer,
> -----Original Message----- From: Brian Roach
> Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 6:09 PM
> To: Guido Medina
> Cc: riak-users at lists.basho.com
> Subject: Re: Java Client Riak Builders...
> Guido -
> The real fix is to enhance the client to support a Collection, I'll add an
> issue for this in github.
> What you would need to do right now is write your own Converter (which
> would really just be a modification of our JSONConverter if you're using
> JSON) that does this for you.
> If you look at the source for JSONConverter you'll see where the indexes
> are processed. As it is, the index processing is handled by the
> RiakIndexConverter<T> class which is where the limitation of requiring the
> annotated field to be a String is coming from (it's actually buried lower
> than that in the underlying annotation processing, but that's the starting
> point for the problem). The actual RiakIndexes class that encapsulates the
> data and exists in the IRiakObject doesn't have this problem.
> The catch is that you'll need to do all the reflection ugliness yourself,
> as that's the part that's broken (the annotation processing).
> Basically, in JSONConverter.fromDomain() you would need to replace
> RiakIndexes indexes = riakIndexConverter.getIndexes(domainObject);
> with your own annotation processing. The same would need to be done in
> JSONConverter.toDomain() at
> Obviously this is not ideal and I'm considering it a bug; I'll put this
> toward to top of the list of things I'm working on right now.
> Brian Roach
> On May 28, 2012, at 8:03 AM, Guido Medina wrote:
>> I'm looking for a work around @RiakIndex annotation to support multiple
>> values per index name, since the annotation is limited to one single
>> value per annotated property (no collection support), I would like to
>> know if there is a way of using the DomainBucketBuilder, mutation &
>> conflict resolver and at the same time has access to a method signature
>> like addIndex(String or int)...addIndex(String or int)...build() same as
>> you can do with RiakObjectBuilder which lacks support for conflict
>> resolution and mutation style.
>> riak-users mailing list
>> riak-users at lists.basho.com
> riak-users mailing list
> riak-users at lists.basho.com
More information about the riak-users