The clear quick win would be caching parsing/planning/pruning on the server and reusing (if executed within time t or until statement/connection are closed).
My thinking is to get an implementation of the client that is opaque to the server implementation so that we can iterate on preparation without having to constantly update the client. From there, developers can easily experiment with different mechanisms to find what works best for BI tools. -- Jacques Nadeau CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Laurent Goujon <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm currently focusing on the client work, and making sure the C++ client > is not lagging behind the Java one. I personally haven't worked on backend > changes for prepared statements. > > Laurent > > On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 7:32 PM, Parth Chandra <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi Laurent, > > > > I'll take a look at this in the next few days. > > > > On a related note, do you or Venki have a proposal for the backend > > changes (i.e actual implementation of prepare)? It would be a good idea > to > > start a discussion on that. > > > > Parth > > > > On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 3:24 PM, Laurent Goujon <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I just started working on adding support for prepared statements and > > > metadata querying in the C++ Drill client. Hopefully, nobody else has > > > started working on this (The Drill jiras don't mention any activity on > > > this), but if it is not the case, let me know. > > > > > > My working branch is > > > https://github.com/laurentgo/drill/tree/laurent/improve-native-client. > > > > > > For now, I just have a basic interface API ( > > > https://github.com/laurentgo/drill/commit/ > 1f55a3e631cd97016b113b9d4bca07 > > > b5e016a25e), > > > and it would be nice if people knowledgeable about the C++ client could > > > review it and give me some feedback. I'm also adding an actual initial > > > implementation in the coming days. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > Laurent > > > > > >
