-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/31404/#review74226
-----------------------------------------------------------



ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/udf/generic/GenericUDF.java
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/31404/#comment120755>

    Why go away from using the formatter as it was doing before? Are there any 
ramifications here to switching to Timestamp.valueOf()? I think 
Timestamp.valueOf() is probably less forgiving when checking the format.



ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/udf/generic/GenericUDF.java
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/31404/#comment120750>

    I'm not sure if all of this is actally necesary, at least at the time that 
you are trying to retrieve a value from a converter. If you created a Converter 
with PrimitiveObjectInspectorFactory.writableLongObjectInspector specified as 
the output type, LongConverter.convert() already has a similar switch statement 
that will do the necessary conversion to give you back a LongWritable object. 
    
    So with a properly created Converter, you would just need to call 
(LongWritable) converter.convert(arguments[i].get())
    
    It would probably be a good idea to still do this checking when creating 
the Converter object.



ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/udf/generic/GenericUDF.java
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/31404/#comment120748>

    Does this need to check for null values, or does the caller check for them 
before calling this method?



ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/udf/generic/GenericUDFAddMonths.java
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/31404/#comment120753>

    Rather than having to convert from long to int (and risk overflow), just 
accept byte/short/int here, and leave the caller of the UDF with the option to 
explicitly cast their long parameter to int if they really want it to work with 
the UDF.



ql/src/test/results/clientpositive/udf_last_day.q.out
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/31404/#comment120756>

    What's the cause of the output difference here?


- Jason Dere


On Feb. 25, 2015, 3:57 a.m., Alexander Pivovarov wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/31404/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Feb. 25, 2015, 3:57 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for hive, Jason Dere and Thejas Nair.
> 
> 
> Bugs: HIVE-9744
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-9744
> 
> 
> Repository: hive-git
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> HIVE-9744 Move common arguments validation and value extraction code to 
> GenericUDF
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/udf/generic/GenericUDF.java 
> 8a0f573648c51c4945be8ffec4a0b06dfa7061c8 
>   ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/udf/generic/GenericUDFAddMonths.java 
> c5968835a74195bea6b31a5c7b7346907fed5ce0 
>   ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/udf/generic/GenericUDFInitCap.java 
> 406fcd608a13fadb8902bf273932acb05a0f3bbe 
>   ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/udf/generic/GenericUDFLastDay.java 
> 3a43c571ae3a83924a00413181a62ce6f4408125 
>   ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/udf/generic/GenericUDFLevenstein.java 
> de41793ba3925aa9e1ad9623d92881c57791f047 
>   ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/udf/generic/GenericUDFNextDay.java 
> 38f08b74609a4018221ca3f5b92cf33799604d60 
>   
> ql/src/test/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/udf/generic/TestGenericUDFAddMonths.java
>  4ccae97a227257294d69f728426f425d060ef0c7 
>   
> ql/src/test/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/udf/generic/TestGenericUDFLevenshtein.java
>  e674d9f38cf7b5cdffcad6eca07dba74ff1e834b 
>   
> ql/src/test/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/udf/generic/TestGenericUDFNextDay.java 
> e2ec551d4ae39d521680ee93c791f14f27811270 
>   ql/src/test/queries/clientpositive/udf_next_day.q 
> db821f00c39b84c4bc59ea70b0cc0aacf69cbd18 
>   ql/src/test/results/clientnegative/udf_add_months_error_1.q.out 
> 8226ac6fe89c38fcc14edeea215cd5cce7258683 
>   ql/src/test/results/clientnegative/udf_add_months_error_2.q.out 
> f00949e9a12285cc91032215372975753c1f3b4a 
>   ql/src/test/results/clientnegative/udf_last_day_error_1.q.out 
> 6e718a0c15e84d89b1cfe7f36231e472ff03c37f 
>   ql/src/test/results/clientnegative/udf_last_day_error_2.q.out 
> dc8e3d14f14205ce65355cd53a95cfc788f45fe0 
>   ql/src/test/results/clientnegative/udf_next_day_error_1.q.out 
> c67b9c42f7e7fdf20caa34d028b02fd4819e8343 
>   ql/src/test/results/clientnegative/udf_next_day_error_2.q.out 
> e3cb6a447bf7bd9f09648e46ace1bcba4da55339 
>   ql/src/test/results/clientpositive/udf_add_months.q.out 
> 8c37fc282a25e350435ff6a4b39e02fc2d4f17df 
>   ql/src/test/results/clientpositive/udf_last_day.q.out 
> 2d39e3897625c7651b110779b89652f0d785bc92 
>   ql/src/test/results/clientpositive/udf_next_day.q.out 
> 37f5640fde267f1635d72f23e76fa89de6403ab5 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/31404/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Alexander Pivovarov
> 
>

Reply via email to