John, First of all, let me say I feel your pain.
But a client should not make assumptions about the names that Calcite assigns. (It’s like using a Java HashMap and making assumptions about iteration order. If the iteration order changes from one version of the JDK to the next, it is not a bug in the JDK; it is a bug in your app.) There have been discussions about this issue on this list recently. Hive needs to use Calcite in the way it was designed — where you identify fields by position, not by name. How long would you need to fix Hive to do this? If you can commit to fixing Hive by a particular date, then I will accept the patch short-term. The modifications would go in deprecated (so no one else starts using them) and I would log an issue to remove them. By the way, I have fixed the other issues. As soon as this is resolved, we can make another RC. Julian On Jan 28, 2015, at 10:17 AM, John Pullokkaran <[email protected]> wrote: > I filed CALCITE-575 to keep track of this. > I have attached a patch to it. > > Patch fixes many of the issues for Hive (~ 25). > > > On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 3:12 PM, John Pullokkaran < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Unfortunately this requires a patch to Calcite. >> I am testing the patch right now. >> >> So far changes are to RelFieldTrimmer, RexUtil, ProjectRemoveRule. >> >> On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 10:55 AM, John Pullokkaran < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Many of Hive issues seems to be the result of CALCITE-92. >>> >>> I don’t think there is anything wrong with the patch itself, but it >>> breaks Hive’s usage of Calcite (due to Calcite OP tree getting converted >>> back to Hive AST). >>> >>> I am going to try disabling it in Hive’s usage of Calcite; will update >>> soon. >>> >>> John >>> >>> On Jan 27, 2015, at 9:38 AM, Julian Hyde <[email protected]<mailto: >>> [email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 10:11 PM, John Pullokkaran >>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> >>> wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 1:42 PM, John Pullokkaran < >>> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> We seems to have issues with union, subquery, and constants. >>> >>> Currently we are debugging these to find more details. >>> >>> Would update EOB today. >>> >>> So far 2 issues been discovered with Calcite RC; CALCITE-570, CALCITE-571. >>> >>> John, >>> >>> Is that your final list? I have a fix for >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-570, am working on >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-571. I intend to produce >>> a new RC including these and >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-567 and >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-568 (both issues that >>> Vladimir found in RC1). If your list is final RC2 could be as early as >>> end of today. >>> >>> When there is an RC2, would it help to have a few days to review it >>> before I start a vote? >>> >>> Julian >>> >>> >> > > -- > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to > which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have > received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately > and delete it from your system. Thank You.
