[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HUDI-5828?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17692154#comment-17692154
]
kazdy edited comment on HUDI-5828 at 2/22/23 2:16 PM:
------------------------------------------------------
Regarding point 5, in spark there are two apis worth taking a look at:
df.toTable(tablename, hudi)
df.saveAsTable(tablename, hudi)
when using these, spark creates table in metastore as well.
Wouldn't it be cleaner to start pointing users at saveAsTable() and for save()
api require users to provide table name?
As a Hudi user what Sagar said is also compelling :)
was (Author: JIRAUSER284048):
Regarding point 5, in spark there are two apis worth taking a look at:
df.toTable(tablename, hudi)
df.saveAsTable(tablename, hudi)
when using these, spark creates table in metastore as well.
Wouldn't it be cleaner to start pointing users at saveAsTable() and for save()
api require users to provide table name?
> Support df.write.forma("hudi") with out any additional options
> --------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HUDI-5828
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HUDI-5828
> Project: Apache Hudi
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: writer-core
> Reporter: sivabalan narayanan
> Priority: Major
>
> Wrt simplifying the usage of hudi among more users, we should try to see if
> we can support writing to hudi w/o any options during write.
>
> For eg, we can do the following with paruqet writes.
> {code:java}
> df.write.format("parquet").save(path)
> {code}
>
> So, for a non-partitioned dataset, we should try if we can support this
> usability.
>
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
