Thanks julian. On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 7:16 AM, Julian Hyde <[email protected]> wrote:
> Everything I know I've already said in this thread. > > On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 4:02 PM, Jiunn Jye Ng <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi > > Jira case 616 raised for this > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-616 > > > > Can you suggest if there are any workaround to force the JdbcSort into > > action ? > > > > Thank you. > > > > Rgds, > > jay > > > > On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 3:30 AM, Vladimir Sitnikov < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > >> >Every extra variable (e.g. column count) you add is a new > >> opportunity for something to go wrong. > >> > >> I see that, however you need something to make project that reduces > >> columns cheaper, don't you? > >> On the other hand, if you use (rows, cpu) costing tuple, what would > >> you consider cheaper (2 rows, 3 cpu) or (3 rows, 2 cpu)? > >> The easiest way to compare costs is to use "rows + X*cpu" formula, > >> that basically requires some coefficient. > >> > >> > query failed to use JdbcSort > >> Well, I just picked a first JdbcTest test that did instantiate JdbcSort. > >> Of course we need a separate issue for sorting (i.e. simplest case for > it). > >> > >> Vladimir > >> >
