> On March 27, 2017, 11:24 a.m., Rajat Khandelwal wrote: > > lens-examples/src/main/resources/virtualfact1.xml > > Lines 25 (patched) > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/57908/diff/4/?file=1676661#file1676661line25> > > > > I think filter will only be where clauses. conditions on measures are > > part of having clauses. We can keep one more property for having clauses. > > Amareshwari Sriramadasu wrote: > Filters should be mandatory as well, can add one more XProperties with > mandatory filter properties. > > Puneet Gupta wrote: > Any more thoughts on how virtual fact will evolve in future? We can > consider those to have the xsd defined in a generic way (and may be not have > filter as mandatory element/property). Rajitha has captured some like hiding > some columns in virtual fact or dropping some storages.
Won't making the filters mandatory restrict virtual fact to be used always with a filter? If there is a need to define a fact without a filter but say dropping a storage or anything similar, virtual facts can't be used. Should we have it defined this way? - Rajitha ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/57908/#review170154 ----------------------------------------------------------- On March 27, 2017, 9:55 a.m., Rajitha R wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/57908/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated March 27, 2017, 9:55 a.m.) > > > Review request for lens and Rajat Khandelwal. > > > Repository: lens > > > Description > ------- > > Xsd for virtual fact > > > Diffs > ----- > > lens-api/src/main/resources/cube-0.1.xsd 060eb43 > lens-examples/src/main/resources/virtualfact1.xml PRE-CREATION > > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/57908/diff/4/ > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > Rajitha R > >
