Thanks!!!
On 5/21/08, Santhosh Srinivasan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Pi, > > I pushed out a patch today to handle null schemas in LOUnion. I am > reviewing your patch which has the changes for merging schemas. > > We should go with 2 where every operator supports null schemas. > > Thanks, > Santhosh > > > -----Original Message----- > From: pi song [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 4:23 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Handling of untyped execution in type branch? > > Attention!!!: This is an important design decision. Within 24 hours if > nobody replies, I will assume option (1) to keep the work going. > > Pi > > > On 5/20/08, pi song <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > How do we handle untyped executions? > > > > There are two ways:- > > > > 1. Stick dummy schema of ByteArrays in LOLoad. This way is a bit ugly > but > > very simple to do. Bad things: 1) This enforces maximum tuple arity > for > > untyped execution. 2) We also have to carry a number of schema fields > to > > downstream operators. > > > > 2. Implement all LOs to support null schema. This is more clean but > > requires a bit more work. I still see some LOs like LOUnion that will > die > > immediately in getSchema() if one of the inputs have a null schema. > > > > I am more tempted to do (2) just because I want it to be clean but we > could > > do (1) first if we want to get the whole thing done quickly. > > What about other people's opinion? > > > > Pi > > >
