[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-2946?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15261106#comment-15261106
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on FLINK-2946:
---------------------------------------
Github user fhueske commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/1926#discussion_r61349569
--- Diff:
flink-libraries/flink-table/src/test/scala/org/apache/flink/api/scala/table/test/SortITCase.scala
---
@@ -0,0 +1,147 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
+ * or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file
+ * distributed with this work for additional information
+ * regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file
+ * to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
+ * "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
+ * with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
+ *
+ * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+ *
+ * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
+ * distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
+ * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
+ * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
+ * limitations under the License.
+ */
+
+package org.apache.flink.api.scala.table.test
+
+import org.apache.flink.api.scala.table._
+import org.apache.flink.api.scala.util.CollectionDataSets
+import org.apache.flink.api.scala.{ExecutionEnvironment, _}
+import org.apache.flink.api.table.{Row, TableEnvironment}
+import org.apache.flink.api.table.test.utils.TableProgramsTestBase
+import
org.apache.flink.api.table.test.utils.TableProgramsTestBase.TableConfigMode
+import
org.apache.flink.test.util.MultipleProgramsTestBase.TestExecutionMode
+import org.apache.flink.test.util.TestBaseUtils
+import org.junit._
+import org.junit.runner.RunWith
+import org.junit.runners.Parameterized
+
+import scala.collection.JavaConverters._
+
+@RunWith(classOf[Parameterized])
+class SortITCase(
+ mode: TestExecutionMode,
+ configMode: TableConfigMode)
+ extends TableProgramsTestBase(mode, configMode) {
+
+ def getExecutionEnvironment = {
+ val env = ExecutionEnvironment.getExecutionEnvironment
+ env.setParallelism(4)
+ env
+ }
+
+ val tupleDataSetStrings = List((1, 1L, "Hi")
+ ,(2, 2L, "Hello")
+ ,(3, 2L, "Hello world")
+ ,(4, 3L, "Hello world, how are you?")
+ ,(5, 3L, "I am fine.")
+ ,(6, 3L, "Luke Skywalker")
+ ,(7, 4L, "Comment#1")
+ ,(8, 4L, "Comment#2")
+ ,(9, 4L, "Comment#3")
+ ,(10, 4L, "Comment#4")
+ ,(11, 5L, "Comment#5")
+ ,(12, 5L, "Comment#6")
+ ,(13, 5L, "Comment#7")
+ ,(14, 5L, "Comment#8")
+ ,(15, 5L, "Comment#9")
+ ,(16, 6L, "Comment#10")
+ ,(17, 6L, "Comment#11")
+ ,(18, 6L, "Comment#12")
+ ,(19, 6L, "Comment#13")
+ ,(20, 6L, "Comment#14")
+ ,(21, 6L, "Comment#15"))
+
+ @Test
+ def testOrderByDesc(): Unit = {
+ val env = getExecutionEnvironment
+ val tEnv = TableEnvironment.getTableEnvironment(env, config)
+
+ val ds = CollectionDataSets.get3TupleDataSet(env)
+ val t = ds.toTable(tEnv).orderBy('_1.desc)
+ implicit def rowOrdering[T <: Product] = Ordering.by((x : T) =>
+ - x.productElement(0).asInstanceOf[Int])
+
+ val expected = sortExpectedly(tupleDataSetStrings)
+ val results = t.toDataSet[Row].mapPartition(rows =>
Seq(rows.toSeq)).collect()
+
+ val result = results.filterNot(_.isEmpty).sortBy(p =>
p.min).reduceLeft(_ ++ _)
--- End diff --
`p.min` should be `p.head` because p should already be sorted (same applies
for the other tests as well).
> Add orderBy() to Table API
> --------------------------
>
> Key: FLINK-2946
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-2946
> Project: Flink
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: Table API
> Reporter: Timo Walther
> Assignee: Dawid Wysakowicz
>
> In order to implement a FLINK-2099 prototype that uses the Table APIs code
> generation facilities, the Table API needs a sorting feature.
> I would implement it the next days. Ideas how to implement such a sorting
> feature are very welcome. Is there any more efficient way instead of
> {{.sortPartition(...).setParallism(1)}}? Is it better to sort locally on the
> nodes first and finally sort on one node afterwards?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
