[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DRILL-4411?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15191801#comment-15191801
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on DRILL-4411:
---------------------------------------
Github user minji-kim commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/drill/pull/381#discussion_r55926325
--- Diff:
exec/java-exec/src/main/java/org/apache/drill/exec/physical/impl/join/HashJoinBatch.java
---
@@ -532,6 +542,9 @@ public void close() {
if (hashTable != null) {
hashTable.clear();
}
+
+ container.clear();
+ outputAllocator.close();
--- End diff --
Yes, it could be if we close before calling next()/buildSchema(). I will
add a check for null.
> HashJoin should not only depend on number of records, but also on size
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DRILL-4411
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DRILL-4411
> Project: Apache Drill
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Server
> Reporter: MinJi Kim
> Assignee: MinJi Kim
>
> In HashJoinProbeTemplate, each batch is limited to TARGET_RECORDS_PER_BATCH
> (4000). But we should not only depend on the number of records, but also
> size (in case of extremely large records).
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
