[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SQOOP-1631?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14231588#comment-14231588
]
Jarek Jarcec Cecho commented on SQOOP-1631:
-------------------------------------------
Thank you for the patch [~yamaguchimsf]. I'm slightly worried about putting
connector specific conditions into the generic {{ExportTool}} class as that can
very easily get out of hands (as we will start adding more and more connector
specific checks).
I've myself written (proprietary) connector that was creating temporary tables
for each map tasks and I did not have a need to re-use the
{{--staging-table-name}} parameter. Quickly looking at the code of
{{PGBulkloadManager}} it seems to me that the staging table parameter is not
used there, so I would assume that users shouldn't be using the parameter
{{--staging-table-name}} with {{PGBulkloadManager}} at all because it's a
no-op, right?
If that is correct, then the proper solution would be to either ignore this
parameter completely (unfortunate, but we are doing that a lot in the Sqoop 1)
or provide some sort of parameter validation check directly in
{{PGBulkloadManager}} that will detect if user used parameters that are not
supported by this special connector.
> Staging-table name check don't need using PGBulkloadManager
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SQOOP-1631
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SQOOP-1631
> Project: Sqoop
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: connectors/postgresql
> Affects Versions: 1.4.6
> Reporter: Masahiro Yamaguchi
> Attachments: SQOOP-1631_1.patch, SQOOP-1631_2.patch
>
>
> If we use PGBulkloadManager, the number of staging-tables equals number of
> map tasks.
> And staging-table's name is decided as follows.
> tmpTableName = table + "_" + context.getTaskAttemptID().toString();
> ExportTools check staging-table's name, but this check don't need using
> PGBulkloadManager.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
