# Uses of Class
com.ocient.jdbc.proto.PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder

Packages that use PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder
Package | Description
--- | ---
com.ocient.jdbc.proto |

## Uses of PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder in com.ocient.jdbc.proto

Methods in com.ocient.jdbc.proto that return PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder
Modifier and Type | Method | Description
--- | --- | ---
`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`addAllDirections​(Iterable<? extends Boolean> values)` | The directions for each sort col - true = ascending
`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`addAllHashSortKeys​(Iterable<String> values)` | The hash sort keys if there are any, primarily only for window these can be different from the regular sort keys if this isn't empty we do a hash based sort mutliplexing instead
`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`addAllNullsFirst​(Iterable<? extends Boolean> values)` | `repeated bool nulls_first = 6;`

`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder`

PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`addAllPoint​(Iterable<? extends PlanProtocol.SortPartition> values)`

This defines the list of partitioning points for dividing the sort into streams There's no guarantees on the size of this It could be completely empty, which could happen if it look like all the data has the same sort key - implies that we don't know what to do besides one sort stream There is no guarantee that the partitioning points are in order

`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`addAllSortKeys​(Iterable<String> values)` | The sort columns - order matters
`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`addDirections​(boolean value)` | The directions for each sort col - true = ascending
`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`addHashSortKeys​(String value)` | The hash sort keys if there are any, primarily only for window these can be different from the regular sort keys if this isn't empty we do a hash based sort mutliplexing instead
`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`addHashSortKeysBytes​(com.google.protobuf.ByteString value)` | The hash sort keys if there are any, primarily only for window these can be different from the regular sort keys if this isn't empty we do a hash based sort mutliplexing instead
`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`addNullsFirst​(boolean value)` | `repeated bool nulls_first = 6;`

`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder`

PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`addPoint​(int index, PlanProtocol.SortPartition value)`

This defines the list of partitioning points for dividing the sort into streams There's no guarantees on the size of this It could be completely empty, which could happen if it look like all the data has the same sort key - implies that we don't know what to do besides one sort stream There is no guarantee that the partitioning points are in order

`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder`

PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`addPoint​(int index, PlanProtocol.SortPartition.Builder builderForValue)`

This defines the list of partitioning points for dividing the sort into streams There's no guarantees on the size of this It could be completely empty, which could happen if it look like all the data has the same sort key - implies that we don't know what to do besides one sort stream There is no guarantee that the partitioning points are in order

`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder`

PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`addPoint​(PlanProtocol.SortPartition value)`

This defines the list of partitioning points for dividing the sort into streams There's no guarantees on the size of this It could be completely empty, which could happen if it look like all the data has the same sort key - implies that we don't know what to do besides one sort stream There is no guarantee that the partitioning points are in order

`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder`

PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`addPoint​(PlanProtocol.SortPartition.Builder builderForValue)`

This defines the list of partitioning points for dividing the sort into streams There's no guarantees on the size of this It could be completely empty, which could happen if it look like all the data has the same sort key - implies that we don't know what to do besides one sort stream There is no guarantee that the partitioning points are in order

`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`addRepeatedField​(com.google.protobuf.Descriptors.FieldDescriptor field, Object value)` |
`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`addSortKeys​(String value)` | The sort columns - order matters
`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`addSortKeysBytes​(com.google.protobuf.ByteString value)` | The sort columns - order matters
`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`clear()` |
`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`clearDirections()` | The directions for each sort col - true = ascending
`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`clearField​(com.google.protobuf.Descriptors.FieldDescriptor field)` |
`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`clearHashSortKeys()` | The hash sort keys if there are any, primarily only for window these can be different from the regular sort keys if this isn't empty we do a hash based sort mutliplexing instead
`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`clearLimitVal()` | If we know we only need the top n rows of the sort that is noted here If there is no limit being applied, this is set to -1
`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`clearNullsFirst()` | `repeated bool nulls_first = 6;`
`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`clearOneof​(com.google.protobuf.Descriptors.OneofDescriptor oneof)` |

`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder`

PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`clearPoint()`

This defines the list of partitioning points for dividing the sort into streams There's no guarantees on the size of this It could be completely empty, which could happen if it look like all the data has the same sort key - implies that we don't know what to do besides one sort stream There is no guarantee that the partitioning points are in order

`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`clearSortKeys()` | The sort columns - order matters
`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`clone()` |
`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.Operator.Builder.`getSortOperatorBuilder()` | `.xg.db.sqlPlans.SortOperator sort_operator = 43;`
`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`mergeFrom​(com.google.protobuf.CodedInputStream input, com.google.protobuf.ExtensionRegistryLite extensionRegistry)` |
`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`mergeFrom​(com.google.protobuf.Message other)` |
`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`mergeFrom​(PlanProtocol.SortOperator other)` |
`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`mergeUnknownFields​(com.google.protobuf.UnknownFieldSet unknownFields)` |
`static PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.`newBuilder()` |
`static PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.`newBuilder​(PlanProtocol.SortOperator prototype)` |
`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.`newBuilderForType()` |
`protected PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.`newBuilderForType​(com.google.protobuf.GeneratedMessageV3.BuilderParent parent)` |

`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder`

PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`removePoint​(int index)`

This defines the list of partitioning points for dividing the sort into streams There's no guarantees on the size of this It could be completely empty, which could happen if it look like all the data has the same sort key - implies that we don't know what to do besides one sort stream There is no guarantee that the partitioning points are in order

`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`setDirections​(int index, boolean value)` | The directions for each sort col - true = ascending
`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`setField​(com.google.protobuf.Descriptors.FieldDescriptor field, Object value)` |
`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`setHashSortKeys​(int index, String value)` | The hash sort keys if there are any, primarily only for window these can be different from the regular sort keys if this isn't empty we do a hash based sort mutliplexing instead
`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`setLimitVal​(long value)` | If we know we only need the top n rows of the sort that is noted here If there is no limit being applied, this is set to -1
`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`setNullsFirst​(int index, boolean value)` | `repeated bool nulls_first = 6;`

`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder`

PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`setPoint​(int index, PlanProtocol.SortPartition value)`

This defines the list of partitioning points for dividing the sort into streams There's no guarantees on the size of this It could be completely empty, which could happen if it look like all the data has the same sort key - implies that we don't know what to do besides one sort stream There is no guarantee that the partitioning points are in order

`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder`

PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`setPoint​(int index, PlanProtocol.SortPartition.Builder builderForValue)`

This defines the list of partitioning points for dividing the sort into streams There's no guarantees on the size of this It could be completely empty, which could happen if it look like all the data has the same sort key - implies that we don't know what to do besides one sort stream There is no guarantee that the partitioning points are in order

`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`setRepeatedField​(com.google.protobuf.Descriptors.FieldDescriptor field, int index, Object value)` |
`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`setSortKeys​(int index, String value)` | The sort columns - order matters
`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder.`setUnknownFields​(com.google.protobuf.UnknownFieldSet unknownFields)` |
`PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.SortOperator.`toBuilder()` |

Methods in com.ocient.jdbc.proto with parameters of type PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder
Modifier and Type | Method | Description
--- | --- | ---
`PlanProtocol.Operator.Builder` | PlanProtocol.Operator.Builder.`setSortOperator​(PlanProtocol.SortOperator.Builder builderForValue)` | `.xg.db.sqlPlans.SortOperator sort_operator = 43;`