You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Buffer.concat, particularly on the whole rowgroup buffers can get expensive memory wise, as we'll end up with two copies of the whole buffer (the individual parts and the concatenated version) for a moment before the garbage-collector picks up the pieces. This can limit the maximum size of the rowgroup.
It might be more efficient to return bodyParts (a sequential array of bufffers) in general instead of buffer.concat and then in writeSection we loop through the bodyParts and write them sequentially.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
ZJONSSON
changed the title
Replace returning buffer.concat with an array of buffers
Return array of buffers instead of buffer.concat
Feb 16, 2018
Buffer.concat
, particularly on the whole rowgroup buffers can get expensive memory wise, as we'll end up with two copies of the whole buffer (the individual parts and the concatenated version) for a moment before the garbage-collector picks up the pieces. This can limit the maximum size of the rowgroup.It might be more efficient to return bodyParts (a sequential array of bufffers) in general instead of
buffer.concat
and then inwriteSection
we loop through the bodyParts and write them sequentially.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: