Julian, I filed an issue regarding this. Please modify the summary / content if it's not appropriate. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-1349
Thanks, Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) 2016년 8월 7일 (일) 오전 3:56, Julian Hyde <[email protected]>님이 작성: > Right now, you’re the first user to ask for a runtime module. The > cost:benefit doesn’t justify it yet. > > Regarding Guava. We test Calcite against a wide range of Guava versions. > Use your own version (anything between 13 and 20) and Calcite won’t mind. > > You’re right that SqlFunctions isn’t as clean as I thought it was. The use > of Avatica stuff like ByteString doesn’t concern me: they’re small, runtime > classes. DataContext pulls in some more dependencies (like SchemaPlus) so > we should deal with that. > > Can you please log a JIRA case to track all this? > > Julian > > > > > On Aug 5, 2016, at 6:32 PM, Jungtaek Lim <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi Julian, > > > > Thanks for the quick answer. > > > > Looking at SqlFunctions in master branch, it depends on various libraries > > including avatica and linq4j, and also refers outside of runtime package > of > > calcite. I could copy that classes and transitive imported classes as > well, > > but I'm not sure other projects were doing same things. > > > > If calcite project maintains calcite-runtime module with smallest > > dependencies that would be awesome for users. I'm trying to avoid > > adding calcite-core as dependency since it depends on Guava, the > > problematic thing of dependency hell. > > > > Thanks, > > Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) > > > > On Saturday, August 6, 2016, Julian Hyde <[email protected] <mailto: > [email protected]>> wrote: > > > >> We didn’t really consider this when we designed Storm - Calcite > >> integration. But the good news is that SqlFunctions is a smallish class > >> with almost no dependencies. It, along with the rest of the > >> org.apache.calcite.runtime package, could in principle be copied into > >> Storm. (I’m not keen on creating a new calcite-runtime.jar but I could > be > >> persuaded if someone made a strong case.) > >> > >>> On Aug 5, 2016, at 12:34 AM, Jungtaek Lim <[email protected] > >> <javascript:;>> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi devs, > >>> > >>> I'm newbie of Calcite so I'd first say sorry for the ignorance if it's > >>> newbie question. > >>> > >>> I'm working on Storm SQL which uses Calcite to compile SQL to topology. > >>> Current implementation uses SqlFunctions to cover some operators so > >>> calcite-core and transitive dependencies are needed even though > compiled > >>> topology in runtime. > >>> > >>> So I'd like to see what's preferred way of handling this. Is it common > to > >>> add calcite-core to dependency in runtime, or is it common for > individual > >>> projects to have their own similar classes? > >>> > >>> Thanks in advance, > >>> Jungtaek Lim (HeartSaVioR) > >> > >> > > > > -- > > Name : Jungtaek Lim > > Blog : http://medium.com/@heartsavior <http://medium.com/@heartsavior> > > Twitter : http://twitter.com/heartsavior <http://twitter.com/heartsavior > > > > LinkedIn : http://www.linkedin.com/in/heartsavior < > http://www.linkedin.com/in/heartsavior> >
