[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-1389?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15999254#comment-15999254
]
Hao Tan commented on CALCITE-1389:
----------------------------------
Hi Michael Mior, I tried out this new rule and it seems that I am not able to
match A join B join C to a view created by another permutation (e.g. B join C
join A). View query uses the same set of table and contains all columns
required by the query. Have you tested similar cases for this rule? In
MaterializationTest.java, I can only find case that only binary join is used.
BTW, Does calcite has a complete implementation of the techniques covered in
ftp://ftp.cse.buffalo.edu/users/azhang/disc/SIGMOD/pdf-files/331/202-optimizing.pdf
for materialized view matching?
> Add rule to perform rewriting of queries using materialized views with joins
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CALCITE-1389
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-1389
> Project: Calcite
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: core
> Reporter: Michael Mior
> Assignee: Michael Mior
> Fix For: 1.11.0
>
>
> I've been looking into implementing the approach from the following paper.
> It's very nicely written and easy to follow. It also doesn't require trying
> different join permutations. I'm starting with several additional
> restrictions (only equijoins, no aggregations, etc.)
> ftp://ftp.cse.buffalo.edu/users/azhang/disc/SIGMOD/pdf-files/331/202-optimizing.pdf
> Thanks to [~jcamachorodriguez] for his help in sorting out some issues with
> the rule so far.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
