On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 12:41 PM, rahul challapalli < [email protected]> wrote:
> If my memory is correct it should actually merge the system properties with > td.properties before returning td > On Nov 12, 2013 9:36 AM, "Tim Williams" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > No joy. I don't see how even that would work unless we're expecting > > the system properties to be merged with the tabledescriptor.properties > > when the tabledescriptor is returned? > I think this is what the expected behavior should be. > > > > To check that, I changed TableAdmin.describe locally to merge in the > > system properties and it works fine. I'm not sure if that's how you > > were thinking it should behave or not though? Thoughts? > Ok, we should probably modify the TableAdmin.describe to do that. Perhaps change TableAdmin.describe to pull it's TD from TableContext, that why the properties will be merged in? What do you think? Aaron > > > > Thanks, > > --tim > > > > On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Aaron McCurry <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-blur.git;a=blob;f=blur-mapred/src/main/java/org/apache/blur/mapreduce/lib/BlurOutputFormat.java;h=caa350450918003175978924a9478533850eb7c3;hb=blur-console-v2#l397 > > > > > > I think for the MR job to pickup the custom fields you will need to run > > the > > > following in order. > > > > > > TD td1 = new TD(); > > > client.create(td1); > > > TD td2 = client.describe(td1.name); > > > // Then if you use td2 for your MR job you will get the system fields I > > > think. > > > > > > Let me know. > > > > > > Aaron > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Tim Williams <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > >> I don't see where the TableContext created in outputformat could have > > >> access to the cluster's configuration or jar files. Maybe when the > > >> cluster is initialized it should write the configuration and jars to > > >> HDFS, making it available to the output format? If so, should the > > >> writer be arranged with zk? Or is there another plan I'm not seeing > > >> in there? > > >> > > >> Thanks, > > >> --tim > > >> > > >> > > >> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 10:34 AM, Aaron McCurry <[email protected]> > > >> wrote: > > >> > It should be supported, this seems like a bug. > > >> > > > >> > Aaron > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 10:29 AM, Tim Williams < > [email protected]> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > > >> >> It seems to be the case that when building a table with the > > >> >> BlurOutputFormat, we need to follow the per-table custom field > > >> >> definitions vs. cluster-wide. If there's no plan to support > > >> >> cluster-wide custom defs with m/r we should just document the > > >> >> per-table version I reckon, thoughts? > > >> >> > > >> >> Thanks, > > >> >> --tim > > >> >> > > >> > > >
