That's a pretty good argument against defaulting to transactional tables.
You are right that it doesn't work out-of-the box with most other engines -
writing files into the base directory of the table/partition will not work
as intended afaik.

On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 1:10 PM Shant Hovsepian <sh...@cloudera.com> wrote:

> How compatible with other engines is the insert only transaction type.
>
> Very often data is loaded with spark, especially for cases with complex
> types where it's the only option. Will landing parquet files in the table
> path just work even if we don't get consistent inserts or does spark need
> to be aware of the table format in either case?
>
> -Shant
>
> On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 3:09 PM Sahil Takiar <takiar.sa...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > +1 on query results spooling, I've been thinking about enabling it by
> > default recently since it seems to be relatively stable.
> >
> > On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 11:41 AM Tim Armstrong <tarmstr...@cloudera.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I'm going to revive this thread. I thought of a few more defaults that
> we
> > > might want to change. These are default changes we (putting on Cloudera
> > hat
> > > temporarily) have made for some new production deployments and have
> been
> > > happy with.
> > >
> > > Query result spooling has a bunch of advantages for resource
> consumption
> > > and fetch speed. It uses a bounded amount of memory and scratch space,
> > but
> > > I think it's overall a better default. We've been using it in
> production
> > > for a while now and haven't had any issues.
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://impala.apache.org/docs/build/html/topics/impala_spool_query_results.html
> > >
> > > I think we should also switch the default file format to parquet,
> because
> > > it's more correct (default text has some issues with escaping) and
> > because
> > > it's more performant.
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://impala.apache.org/docs/build/html/topics/impala_default_file_format.html
> > >
> > > We could also consider creating insert_only transactional tables by
> > default
> > > -
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://impala.apache.org/docs/build/html/topics/impala_default_transactional_type.html
> > > .
> > > The pros and cons here are more complex - we get more consistent
> > behaviour
> > > by default, but there can be perf/scalability consequences.
> > >
> > > Any objections or thoughts on these?
> > >
> > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 4:44 PM Tim Armstrong <tarmstr...@cloudera.com
> >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I think ARM support can ship in whatever release it's reading in,
> since
> > > > it's not a breaking change.
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 9:43 PM 赵 仁海 <zhaoren...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Thanks
> > > >> I will work hard on this ^_^
> > > >>
> > > >> ________________________________
> > > >> 发件人: Jim Apple <apa...@jbapple.com>
> > > >> 发送时间: 2020年3月19日 10:21
> > > >> 收件人: dev@impala.apache.org <dev@impala.apache.org>
> > > >> 主题: Re: Impala 4.0 breaking changes
> > > >>
> > > >> I agree. I don’t know how far we are from having arm64 support,
> > though,
> > > >> and
> > > >> we might not get there for a 4.0 release, I’d guess. But that
> doesn’t
> > > mean
> > > >> it couldn’t arrive by the time for 4.1 or 4.7 or 5.55 or whatever.
> > > >>
> > > >> On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 6:32 PM Joe McDonnell <
> > > joemcdonn...@cloudera.com>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > Patches to add support for arm64 are definitely welcome in any
> > > release.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Thanks,
> > > >> > Joe
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 6:11 PM 赵 仁海 <zhaoren...@hotmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > Hi
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Could we  add support for arm64?
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Thanks
> > > >> > > Zhao Renhai
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > ________________________________
> > > >> > > 发件人: Joe McDonnell <joemcdonn...@cloudera.com>
> > > >> > > 发送时间: 2020年3月17日 1:07
> > > >> > > 收件人: dev@impala.apache.org <dev@impala.apache.org>
> > > >> > > 主题: Impala 4.0 breaking changes
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Now that Impala 3.4 is branched and master is Impala 4.0, we
> need
> > to
> > > >> > decide
> > > >> > > what breaking changes will happen in Impala 4.0. I have
> provided a
> > > >> series
> > > >> > > of proposals below. I welcome feedback on them. Other proposals
> > are
> > > >> also
> > > >> > > welcome.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Thanks,
> > > >> > > Joe
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Proposal 0: Hadoop component versions
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Switch to CDP versions of components by default. This means that
> > > >> Impala
> > > >> > > will use Hive 3+ (which is already essentially Hive 4 and may
> > change
> > > >> > names
> > > >> > > to being Hive 4).
> > > >> > > Remove support for CDH versions of components.
> > > >> > > This was already discussed in the original thread for Impala 4,
> so
> > > >> this
> > > >> > is
> > > >> > > not new.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Proposal 1: OS support
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Drop support for Centos 6, Ubuntu 14, and Debian (all versions)
> > > >> > > Retain support for Ubuntu 16, Ubuntu 18, Centos 7, and SLES 12
> > > >> > > Centos 7 development will be focused on newer Centos 7 versions
> > such
> > > >> as
> > > >> > 7.6
> > > >> > > and 7.7.
> > > >> > > Add support for Centos 8
> > > >> > > Move main development from Ubuntu 16 to Ubuntu 18 over time.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Proposal 2: Python support
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Drop support for Python 2.6
> > > >> > > Add support for Python 3 over time.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Proposal 3: Impala-lzo
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Drop support for Impala-lzo/hadoop-lzo
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Proposal 4: Clients
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Deprecate beeswax protocol. This means that it can be removed in
> > the
> > > >> next
> > > >> > > major version number, but it would not be removed in Impala 4.
> > > Current
> > > >> > > users of beeswax would need to start migrating to HS2.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Proposal 5: Sentry
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Drop support for Sentry in favor of Ranger.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Proposal 6: Metadata
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Metadata V2 will become the default. Metadata V1 will be
> > deprecated.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Thanks,
> > > >> > > Joe
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Sahil Takiar
> > Software Engineer
> > takiar.sa...@gmail.com | (510) 673-0309
> >
>

Reply via email to