gianm commented on issue #11929: URL: https://github.com/apache/druid/issues/11929#issuecomment-974315460
It sounds like PARTITION BY and CLUSTER BY are the winners! Works for me. I'm planning to put up a patch soon with the initial work to support planning INSERT (parts 1–3 and 5 from the "Proposed changes" list in the original proposal). I probably won't do any special parser stuff in that patch, since I think it'll get too complicated to try to do it all at once. So it will probably need to be a sequence of a few patches to get everything in place. > As for the type signature, I want to know do we have plan to support DDL such as CREATE TABLE? If DDL is supported, we can split the type signatures into a CREATE TABLE statement which would be more convenient for users to get started with Druid. I don't have a solid plan but I would like to support CREATE TABLE at some point. I imagine it would involve having a place to put datasource-level metadata like preferred partitioning, preferred schema, etc. I think it is a strength of Druid that datasources don't _have to_ have a strict schema, so I wouldn't want to enforce that, but I think it'd be good to let people create some schema if they want to. I also imagine that if you _did_ have a schema defined at the table level, then the INSERT command wouldn't necessarily have to always have a type signature, because in many cases it could be inferred from the table schema. So I think at that point we would want to make it optional. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
