Il Mer 25 Nov 2020, 05:57 Haisheng Yuan <hy...@apache.org> ha scritto:
> > I would like to propose to decouple the "core" module from "ling4j" and > Avatica. > I like the idea. > > Moving Enumerable out of core may be time consuming and disruptive, > because many core tests are using Enumerable to verify plan quality and > correctness. > > Best, > Haisheng > > On 2020/11/24 23:42:19, Stamatis Zampetakis <zabe...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Vladimir, > > > > Personally, I like the idea. > > I had similar thoughts in the past but it didn't try to break it down > since > > those dependencies were not causing any real trouble. > > > > Let's see what the others think. > I like the idea of having a smaller footprint. In HerdDB project we need to reduce as much as possible the size of the dependencies and Avatica is not useful but have to import it. Also it would be better to make most of thirdparty dependencies optional if you do not need them, I am talking about Json and geometry support for instance. Thank you for bringing up this proposal! Enrico > > > Best, > > Stamatis > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 7:30 PM Vladimir Ozerov <ppoze...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > Hi colleagues, > > > > > > Many Calcite integrations use only part of the framework. > Specifically, it > > > is common to use only the parser/optimizer part. JDBC and runtime are > used > > > less frequently because they are not very well suited for mature > processing > > > engines (e.g. Enumerable runs out of memory easily). > > > > > > However, in order to use the parser/optimizer from the core module, you > > > also need to add "linq4j" and Avatica modules to the classpath, which > is > > > not convenient - why to include modules, that you do not use? > > > > > > It turns out that most of the dependencies are indeed leaky > abstractions, > > > that could be decoupled easily. For example, the RelOptUtil class from > the > > > "core" depends on ... two string constants from the Avatica module. > > > > > > I would like to propose to decouple the "core" module from "ling4j" and > > > Avatica. For example, we may introduce the new "common" module, that > will > > > hold common constants, utility classes, and interfaces (e.g. Meta). > Then, > > > we can organize the dependencies like this: > > > common -> core > > > common -> linq4j > > > common -> Avatica > > > > > > Finally, we may shade and relocate the "common" module into the "core" > > > during the build. In the end, we will have -2 runtime dependencies with > > > relatively little effort. In principle, the same approach could be > applied > > > to Janino and Jackson dependencies, but it could be more complex, so my > > > proposal is only about "linq4" and Avatica. > > > > > > How do you feel about it? Does this proposal sense to the community? If > > > yes, I can try implementing the POC for this. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Vladimir. > > > > > >
