“3 months or so” is far too long. My best offer is that I can put it in for 1.0, and remove it in 1.1 (which will be at least 4 weeks, probably early March). You’ll need to fix the issue in Hive in order to upgrade to 1.1.
Julian On Jan 28, 2015, at 12:12 PM, John Pullokkaran <[email protected]> wrote: > As I said before and in the bug the reason for Hive¹s dependency on names > is due to the fact that Calcite plan gets translated to Hive AST. Hive Gen > Plan enforces constraints on certain ops (like in the case of union, the > field names should match). > > Once Hive translates Calcite Ops to Hive Ops directly, this problem would > go away. > The work is scheduled to be completed in another 3 months or so. > > > On 1/28/15, 11:27 AM, "Julian Hyde" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> John, >> >> First of all, let me say I feel your pain. >> >> But a client should not make assumptions about the names that Calcite >> assigns. (It¹s 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 don¹t think there is anything wrong with the patch itself, but it >>>>> breaks Hive¹s usage of Calcite (due to Calcite OP tree getting >>>>> converted >>>>> back to Hive AST). >>>>> >>>>> I am going to try disabling it in Hive¹s 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. >> >
