John Russell has posted comments on this change. Change subject: Major update to Impala + Kudu page ......................................................................
Patch Set 4: (7 comments) Addressed comments through the 'EXPLAIN' topic. http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/5649/4/docs/topics/impala_alter_table.xml File docs/topics/impala_alter_table.xml: PS4, Line 887: Any dropped range must not contain : any data values in that range. > I don't believe this is true -- dropping a range is an efficient way to bul Done http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/5649/4/docs/topics/impala_compute_stats.xml File docs/topics/impala_compute_stats.xml: Line 55: <!-- Is kudu_partition_spec applicable here? --> > nope, because afaik we don't have partition-level stats for kudu (they aren Done http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/5649/4/docs/topics/impala_create_table.xml File docs/topics/impala_create_table.xml: PS4, Line 107: expression > 'expression' here makes it sound like we support computed defaults. Perhaps Done. Changed to 'constant'. I was hoping that the default could be any expression evaluated row-by-row at runtime, like now() or upper(different_column). Line 122: RANGE > this should be RANGE (<varname>pk_col</varname> [, ...]) right? This is how I create a table with range partitioning but no hash partitioning: create table range_only (x int primary key) partition by range (partition 0 <= values <= 50, partition 51 <= values <= 100) stored as kudu The name of the primary key column never gets mentioned in the RANGE clause. Is there an alternative notation that would mention X in this case? PS4, Line 125: constant > perhaps say 'tuple' or something instead? for composite PKs you need someth I'll say constant_or_tuple for the italicized name, and add some examples showing the parens of the tuple notation. For DDL, I'm going to start by showing examples of the variations on the main Kudu page, then migrate them to or reuse them on the individual statement pages. http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/5649/4/docs/topics/impala_explain.xml File docs/topics/impala_explain.xml: PS4, Line 239: he <codeph>EXPLAIN</codeph> statement displays equivalent plan : information for queries against Kudu tables as for queries : against HDFS-based tables. > Don't we need to talk about the predicates that get pushed to Kudu? Done http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/5649/4/docs/topics/impala_grant.xml File docs/topics/impala_grant.xml: Line 134: Access to Kudu tables must be granted to roles as usual. > is it worth noting here that grant/revoke from Impala has no bearing on acc Done. (From this point on, any changes I mark as done will come in a patch set on Thursday.) -- To view, visit http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/5649 To unsubscribe, visit http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/settings Gerrit-MessageType: comment Gerrit-Change-Id: I76dcb948dab08532fe41326b22ef78d73282db2c Gerrit-PatchSet: 4 Gerrit-Project: Impala-ASF Gerrit-Branch: master Gerrit-Owner: John Russell <[email protected]> Gerrit-Reviewer: Ambreen Kazi <[email protected]> Gerrit-Reviewer: Dimitris Tsirogiannis <[email protected]> Gerrit-Reviewer: Jean-Daniel Cryans <[email protected]> Gerrit-Reviewer: John Russell <[email protected]> Gerrit-Reviewer: Matthew Jacobs <[email protected]> Gerrit-Reviewer: Todd Lipcon <[email protected]> Gerrit-HasComments: Yes
