-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 795
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
Address performance issue with BigDecimalParser
#967
Labels
performance
Issue related to performance problems or enhancements
Milestone
Comments
cowtowncoder
added
performance
Issue related to performance problems or enhancements
2.15
labels
Apr 1, 2023
/cc @pjfanning This is one of 2 that we had discussion about |
cowtowncoder
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Apr 1, 2023
Might be useful to backport this to 2.14. |
@pjfanning I guess if it's safe enough, my only concern would be about breaking something. Then again, functionality itself is probably rarely actually used in real-world production (fwtw :) ). |
cowtowncoder
changed the title
Investigate performance of
Investigate performance issue with Apr 4, 2023
BigDecimalParser
(added in #814)BigDecimalParser
cowtowncoder
changed the title
Investigate performance issue with
Address performance issue with Apr 4, 2023
BigDecimalParser
BigDecimalParser
cowtowncoder
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Apr 4, 2023
cowtowncoder
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Apr 4, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Although there were reasons to expect
BigDecimalParser
could help handling of very large numbers -- and was consequently added for 2.14 via #814 -- there are concerns that there are cases where its performance is sub-standard.In particular there are concerns with use of large exponents (scientific-notation) which lead to "big" numbers but ones that are compact enough (wrt textual representation) not to trigger "too big number" guardrails but lead to poor performance.
If and when regular JDK
BigDecimal
parser does not have similar issues, we may need to remove usage.A test case exists to show the issue but I will not include it here: contact me over mailing list(s) for details if interested.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: