[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-1262?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Julian Hyde updated CALCITE-1262:
---------------------------------
Description:
When scans of multiple JDBC tables with separate {{JdbcConvention}} s are
included in the same logical plan, {{VolcanoPlanner}} only fires rules for one
of the conventions. This results in only one of the databases benefiting from
optimizations and forces only {{JdbcToEnumerableConverter}} over
{{JdbcTableScan}} in the other. This seems to be a result of static rule
descriptions in all JDBC rules except {{JdbcToEnumerableConverterRule}}. When
JDBC rule descriptions are changed to include the {{JdbcConvention}}, all rules
are fired as expected.
See [the email
thread|https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/calcite-dev/201605.mbox/%3CCAKa9qDmuNU%3DvBa1wT51n3WbaPqq9v70WSYuNonQFbDDKGVK5jw%40mail.gmail.com%3E].
was:
When scans of multiple JDBC tables with separate {{JdbcConvention}} s are
included in the same logical plan, {{VolcanoPlanner}} only fires rules for one
of the conventions. This results in only one of the databases benefiting from
optimizations and forces only {{JdbcToEnumerableConverter}} over
{{JdbcTableScan}} in the other. This seems to be a result of static rule
descriptions in all JDBC rules except {{JdbcToEnumerableConverterRule}}. When
JDBC rule descriptions are changed to include the {{JdbcConvention}}, all rules
are fired as expected.
[Email
thread|https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/calcite-dev/201605.mbox/%3CCAKa9qDmuNU%3DvBa1wT51n3WbaPqq9v70WSYuNonQFbDDKGVK5jw%40mail.gmail.com%3E].
> Only one set of JDBC rules fire when multiple conventions are used due to
> static rule descriptions
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CALCITE-1262
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-1262
> Project: Calcite
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: core
> Reporter: Jordan Halterman
> Assignee: Julian Hyde
>
> When scans of multiple JDBC tables with separate {{JdbcConvention}} s are
> included in the same logical plan, {{VolcanoPlanner}} only fires rules for
> one of the conventions. This results in only one of the databases benefiting
> from optimizations and forces only {{JdbcToEnumerableConverter}} over
> {{JdbcTableScan}} in the other. This seems to be a result of static rule
> descriptions in all JDBC rules except {{JdbcToEnumerableConverterRule}}. When
> JDBC rule descriptions are changed to include the {{JdbcConvention}}, all
> rules are fired as expected.
> See [the email
> thread|https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/calcite-dev/201605.mbox/%3CCAKa9qDmuNU%3DvBa1wT51n3WbaPqq9v70WSYuNonQFbDDKGVK5jw%40mail.gmail.com%3E].
>
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
