Tim Armstrong has posted comments on this change. Change subject: IMPALA-1583: Simplify PartitionedHashJoinNode::ProcessProbeBatch() ......................................................................
Patch Set 1: (2 comments) Did you do any perf testing? It shouldn't make a difference but there's always a chance that we somehow caused the compiler to produce different output. I had some questions about taking this further and completing the simplification. It would be nice to do it all in one go but I'm ok with this patch as-is. http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/2893/1/be/src/exec/partitioned-hash-join-node-ir.cc File be/src/exec/partitioned-hash-join-node-ir.cc: Line 285: next_row: How hard is it to restructure to avoid the goto? E.g. something like if (no probe row) { get next probe row } process probe row Line 298: current_probe_row_ = probe_batch_iterator.Get(); Can we factor the probe row establishment out into its own function too? Might make it easier to see the high-level algorithm. -- To view, visit http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/2893 To unsubscribe, visit http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/settings Gerrit-MessageType: comment Gerrit-Change-Id: Ie2091bdf97ab34c5cdc84e84394c579a5b36afc0 Gerrit-PatchSet: 1 Gerrit-Project: Impala Gerrit-Branch: cdh5-trunk Gerrit-Owner: Michael Ho <[email protected]> Gerrit-Reviewer: Michael Ho <[email protected]> Gerrit-Reviewer: Tim Armstrong <[email protected]> Gerrit-HasComments: Yes
