[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-4377?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13637859#comment-13637859
]
Phabricator commented on HIVE-4377:
-----------------------------------
njain has commented on the revision "HIVE-4377 [jira] Add more comment to
https://reviews.facebook.net/D1209 (HIVE-2340)".
In general, can you add more high-level comments ?
INLINE COMMENTS
ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/optimizer/ReduceSinkDeDuplication.java:108
Can you file a jira for this, and note the jira number in the comments ?
Also, in case of RS+JOIN, wont R1 be fired ? Can you add a test for this ?
ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/optimizer/ReduceSinkDeDuplication.java:685
isn't this an assert
if no, can u add comments when will it be null
ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/optimizer/ReduceSinkDeDuplication.java:689
same thing:
pRS != null
always
ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/optimizer/ReduceSinkDeDuplication.java:395
Can you add better comments ?
ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/optimizer/ReduceSinkDeDuplication.java:690
Can you add some examples:
1. when merge will be true ?
2. when merge will be false ?
ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/optimizer/ReduceSinkDeDuplication.java:209
Wont it be simpler to handle the GroupBy case in GroupbyProc instead of the
common
parent class ?
ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/optimizer/ReduceSinkDeDuplication.java:216
same thing: why are these cases in the common class ?
ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/optimizer/ReduceSinkDeDuplication.java:251
Can you rename these methods ?
These are not generic methods anymore.
ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/optimizer/ReduceSinkDeDuplication.java:264
Why is this in the common class ?
ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/optimizer/ReduceSinkDeDuplication.java:512
Can you move all these methods in Operator ??
findSingleChild
findSingleParent etc.
ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/optimizer/ReduceSinkDeDuplication.java:719
same as above:
isn't
pJoin != null
always ?
REVISION DETAIL
https://reviews.facebook.net/D10377
To: JIRA, navis
Cc: njain
> Add more comment to https://reviews.facebook.net/D1209 (HIVE-2340)
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HIVE-4377
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-4377
> Project: Hive
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Query Processor
> Reporter: Gang Tim Liu
> Assignee: Navis
> Attachments: HIVE-4377.D10377.1.patch
>
>
> thanks a lot for addressing optimization in HIVE-2340. Awesome!
> Since we are developing at a very fast pace, it would be really useful to
> think about maintainability and testing of the large codebase. Highlights
> which are applicable for D1209:
> 1. Javadoc for all public/private functions, except for
> setters/getters. For any complex function, clear examples (input/output)
> would really help.
> 2. Specially, for query optimizations, it might be a good idea to have
> a simple working query at the top, and the expected changes. For e.g..
> The operator tree for that query at each step, or a detailed explanation
> at the top.
> 3. If possible, the test name (.q file) where the function is being
> invoked, or the query which would potentially test that scenario, if it
> is a query processor change.
> 4. Comments in each test (.q file) that should include the jira
> number, what is it trying to test. Assumptions about each query.
> 5. Reduce the output for each test whenever query is outputting more
> than 10 results, it should have a reason. Otherwise, each query result
> should be bounded by 10 rows.
> thanks a lot
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
