Yes.  It would.  Or the author could host source for a GPL drill add-on.


On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 6:00 PM, Matthew Burgess <[email protected]>
wrote:

> The logparser license is GPLv3, I'm guessing Drill would need a
> dual-license
> from the author?
>
> From:  Ted Dunning <[email protected]>
> Reply-To:  <[email protected]>
> Date:  Thursday, June 18, 2015 at 8:32 PM
> To:  "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> Subject:  Re: regex format
>
> The msot common use of a regex parser in my experience is to parse log
> files.  A better way to parse log files that use CLF format specifiers is
> with the logparse package.
>
> See https://github.com/nielsbasjes/logparser
>
> Should the efforts be focused there?
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 3:11 PM, Jacques Nadeau <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> >  I have some pieces but I don't think there was a Jira out for it.  The
> >  proposal seems good but I'm not sure what is the right way to manage
> >  configuration.  My thought is that is should probably based on udtf but
> we
> >  don't have that facility yet.  We should put something together that
> >  describes how those should work in drill first I would think.
> >  On Jun 18, 2015 11:38 AM, "Jim Scott" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >>  > I recall at some point the topic of supporting a regex format record
> >  reader
> >>  > came up, and I thought that Jacques said that he had this built into
> the
> >>  > test framework and that at some point it should find its way into a
> >  release
> >>  > use.
> >>  >
> >>  > The closest ticket I can find is: DRILL-739 and I don't think that
> quite
> >>  > covers the request.
> >>  >
> >>  > Just wondering if there is any status on this.
> >>  >
> >>  > To clarify the topic it would be to create a file format where you
> could
> >>  > define a regular expression so that when text files are loaded they
> can
> >  be
> >>  > parsed based on that regex. Effectively the grouping from the regular
> >>  > expression would result in columns[n] for each record.
> >>  >
> >
>
>
>
>

Reply via email to