[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TEZ-2221?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14528835#comment-14528835
]
Rohini Palaniswamy commented on TEZ-2221:
-----------------------------------------
bq. Since case 1 (must to have) impact the pig and pig don't use case 2, why
not keep this patch ?
We don't use case 1. We use case 2.
bq. This looks more like hack or workaround for multiple edges. If we need to
support multiple edges, may need to create more elegant API.
In my opinion, having different vertex groups for different outputs or inputs
is more cleaner and gives better control. It is more logical as well and easy
to visualize. Routing multiple inputs and outputs through one vertex group is
actually very complicated and messy. Our query plan construction is also more
simple and easy when using different vertex groups for different outputs. If
only a unique vertex group was allowed our plan was to not touch query
planning, but during DAG construction find the duplicates and reuse VertexGroup.
> VertexGroup name should be unqiue
> ---------------------------------
>
> Key: TEZ-2221
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TEZ-2221
> Project: Apache Tez
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Jeff Zhang
> Assignee: Jeff Zhang
> Fix For: 0.7.0, 0.5.4, 0.6.1
>
> Attachments: TEZ-2221-1.patch, TEZ-2221-2.patch, TEZ-2221-3.patch,
> TEZ-2221-4.patch
>
>
> VertexGroupCommitStartedEvent & VertexGroupCommitFinishedEvent use vertex
> group name to identify the vertex group commit, the same name of vertex group
> will conflict. While in the current equals & hashCode of VertexGroup, vertex
> group name and members name are used.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
