All right, that also works, thanks! Best, Yingyi
On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 5:11 PM, Taewoo Kim <wangs...@gmail.com> wrote: > @Yingyi: Thanks for the suggestion. Actually, I have crated a separate > patch for this change only: https://asterix-gerrit.ics.uci.edu/#/c/1219/. > Once this is merged, the review for the second step would be much easier. > > Best, > Taewoo > > On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 5:08 PM, Yingyi Bu <buyin...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Taewoo, > > > > I agree with you. > > However, can you have two separate changes: > > 1. Your current change https://asterix-gerrit.ics.uci.edu/#/c/1196/. > Call > > your "Split" "PartitionSplit" for now. > > 2. Do what you proposed in the next change which only does the renaming. > > > > That makes reviews less overwhelming and easier. > > > > Best, > > Yingyi > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 5:01 PM, Taewoo Kim <wangs...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Hello All, > > > > > > Regarding the index-only plan, I am going to introduce an operator > named > > > SplitOperator that propagates each tuple to only one output branch. > > > Currently, ReplicateOperator propagates each tuple to all output > > branches. > > > And ReplicatePOperator uses the physical operator tag as SPLIT. I > suggest > > > we change it to REPLICATE. Thus, SPLIT tag can be used for real Split > > > operator. Any thoughts? > > > > > > Best, > > > Taewoo > > > > > >
