@Steven, @Neeraja For now we know partition pruning to fail. While I did not probe further, its not hard to imagine the possibility of wrong results being returned in cases where we have nulls in the varchar partition column.
- Rahul On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 10:48 AM, rahul challapalli < [email protected]> wrote: > While breaking backward compatibility could be justified in cases like > this, doing this without providing a tested upgrade process is unacceptable. > > - Rahul > > On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 10:43 AM, Steven Phillips <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Does DRILL-4070 cause incorrect results? Or just prevent partition >> pruning? >> >> On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Jason Altekruse < >> [email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > I just commented on the JIRA, we are behaving correctly for newly >> created >> > parquet files. I did confirm the failure to prune on auto-partitioned >> files >> > created by 1.2. I do not think this is a release blocker, because I do >> not >> > think we can solve this in Drill code without risking wrong results over >> > parquet files written by other tools. I do support the creation of a >> > migration utility for existing files written by Drill 1.2, but this can >> be >> > released independent of 1.3. >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 10:26 AM, Jinfeng Ni <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > Agree with Aman that DRILL-4070 is a show stopper. Parquet is the >> > > major data source Drill uses. If this release candidate breaks the >> > > backward compatibility of partitioning pruning for the parquet files >> > > created with prior release of Drill, it could cause serious problem >> > > for the current Drill user. >> > > >> > > -1 >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 10:10 AM, rahul challapalli >> > > <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > > -1 (non-binding) >> > > > The nature of the issue (DRILL-4070) demands adequate testing even >> > with a >> > > > workaround in place. >> > > > >> > > > On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Aman Sinha <[email protected]> >> > > wrote: >> > > > >> > > >> Given this issue, I would be a -1 unfortunately. >> > > >> >> > > >> On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 8:42 AM, Aman Sinha <[email protected]> >> > > wrote: >> > > >> >> > > >> > Can someone familiar with the parquet changes take a look at >> > > DRILL-4070 ? >> > > >> > It seems to break backward compatibility. >> > > >> > >> > > >> > On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 9:51 PM, Jacques Nadeau < >> [email protected] >> > > >> > > >> > wrote: >> > > >> > >> > > >> >> Hey Everybody, >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> I'd like to propose a new release candidate of Apache Drill, >> > version >> > > >> >> 1.3.0. This is the third release candidate (rc2). This >> addresses >> > > some >> > > >> >> issues identified in the the second release candidate including >> > some >> > > >> test >> > > >> >> issues & rpc concurrency issues. >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> The tarball artifacts are hosted at [2] and the maven artifacts >> are >> > > >> hosted >> > > >> >> at [3]. This release candidate is based on commit >> > > >> >> 13ab6b1f9897ebcf9179407ffaf84b79b0ee95a1 located at [4]. >> > > >> >> The vote will be open for 72 hours ending at 10PM Pacific, >> November >> > > 13, >> > > >> >> 2015. >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> [ ] +1 >> > > >> >> [ ] +0 >> > > >> >> [ ] -1 >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> thanks, >> > > >> >> Jacques >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> [1] >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> > > >> > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12313820&version=12332946 >> > > >> >> [2]http://people.apache.org/~jacques/apache-drill-1.3.0.rc2/ >> > > >> >> [3] >> > > >> >> >> > > >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachedrill-1013/ >> > > >> >> [4] https://github.com/jacques-n/drill/tree/drill-1.3.0 >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> -- >> > > >> >> Jacques Nadeau >> > > >> >> CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio >> > > >> >> >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> >> > > >> > >> > >
