If you thing hive has "friends" named "DB2, Oracle, teradata, vertica, impala" you are wrong.
Besides the fact that some of them originally took the position that map reduce "was a big step backwards", All of those are commercial products aiming at selling something to people. That is their core motivation and that dictates what they do. That is not our motivation. On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 3:26 AM, Thejas Nair <the...@hortonworks.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 8:39 PM, Edward Capriolo <edlinuxg...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > What is in a name? :) > > > > "Which SQL feature you are talking about here, that forces single reducer > > and hence should not be supported?" > > > > Joining on anything besides = comes to mind > > > > Pretty sure the query mentioned here will not work (without being > > re-written) > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SQL > > > > SELECT isbn, title, price > > FROM Book > > WHERE price < (SELECT AVG(price) FROM Book) > > ORDER BY title; > > Don't you think hive should be supporting this ? Don't you think our > users would want this ? > > You can do theta joins without using single reducer (cartesian product > can be done in parallel). But that is besides the point. I don't > expect hive to be 100% sql compliant. I don't see 100% sql compliance > as a goal, but I see more SQL compliance as desirable. > That is why I prefer the term Hive-SQL. > > > Hive-SQL looks like it is trying to convey the idea that hive supports > > extensions like T-SQL http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transact-SQL or > PL/SQL. > > http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/database/features/plsql/index.html. > > If I refert to something as Oracle-SQL or DB2-SQL, I think people > understand that it is a Oracle or DB2 dialect of SQL that I refer to. > > > Lessons from my mother. > > > You can't be half a saint. > > > "considering how much other databases deviate from the standard - > > http://troels.arvin.dk/db/rdbms/ . See how much deviation is there for > > example in 'limit clause' or the data types supported (and details of > > data type support) -" > > If all your friends jumped off a bridge would you do it? > > My friends are very smart, if they jump of the bridge, there is > probably a very good reason to do so, and I would seriously consider > it. > I think hive has many smart friends like DB2, Oracle, teradata, > vertica, impala, and even phoenix > (https://github.com/forcedotcom/phoenix). > As you can see there is a wide range in SQL compliance across > products. I don't see anything wrong in saying that hive is "SQL on > hadoop". > > I think I have conveyed everything I wanted to say on this topic. I > will stop and listen to what others think before we go from half > saints and jumping over the bridge to Hitler :) > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law) (there I said it!!) > > I am looking forward to hearing if anybody else thinks calling it > "Hive-SQL" will make them confuse it for something like PL/SQL. Also > want to know if others think calling it HiveQL gives more clarity > about it aiming to be "SQL on hadoop" > > Thanks, > Thejas >
