Alexey Serbin has posted comments on this change. ( 
http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/13314 )

Change subject: hms: don't overwrite table type when updating metadata
......................................................................


Patch Set 2:

(10 comments)

http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/13314/2//COMMIT_MSG
Commit Message:

http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/13314/2//COMMIT_MSG@9
PS2, Line 9: During the inception of Kudu's HMS integration, it was assumed that
           : managed/external tables would no longer be supported.
I'm not sure this sounds clear w.r.t. what type of tables were   slated for 
obsolescence: managed or external?


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/13314/2/src/kudu/hms/hms_catalog.h
File src/kudu/hms/hms_catalog.h:

http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/13314/2/src/kudu/hms/hms_catalog.h@41
PS2, Line 41:   MANAGED,
            :   EXTERNAL
nit: re-order to be in alphabetic order?  Or there is some idea to have these 
in this particular order?


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/13314/2/src/kudu/hms/hms_catalog.cc
File src/kudu/hms/hms_catalog.cc:

http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/13314/2/src/kudu/hms/hms_catalog.cc@359
PS2, Line 359: Hive will create HDFS directories when
             :   // creating tables for Kudu
I'm curious why we don't see it with our mini-hms tests.  Is that because 
mini-hms doesn't have the same integration with other hadoop ecosystem as it's 
in the wild?  However, I didn't see anything that would look like HDFS-related 
in our mini-hms configs.

I guess my question here is should we try to add a test scenario for triage the 
mentioned artifact in systests and alike?


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/13314/2/src/kudu/tools/kudu-tool-test.cc
File src/kudu/tools/kudu-tool-test.cc:

http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/13314/2/src/kudu/tools/kudu-tool-test.cc@3254
PS2, Line 3254: ASSERT_TRUE
nit: maybe ASSERT_NE(nullptr, external_table_key) ?


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/13314/2/src/kudu/tools/kudu-tool-test.cc@3269
PS2, Line 3269: HmsClient::kLegacyKuduTableNameKey
Should we verify that the name of Kudu table matches the value of the 
kLegacyKuduTableNameKey property?


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/13314/2/src/kudu/tools/kudu-tool-test.cc@3270
PS2, Line 3270:   ASSERT_FALSE(ContainsKey(hms_table.parameters, 
HmsClient::kKuduTableIdKey));
What about the following fields:
  * have::Table::tableType
  * hive::Table::owner

Is there any constraints on those to check?

Also, what about HmsClient::kKuduMasterAddrsKey property in Hive table?  Should 
it be set to master addresses values as well?


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/13314/2/src/kudu/tools/kudu-tool-test.cc@3291
PS2, Line 3291: // Start with legacy managed and external tables.
This seems non-complete.


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/13314/2/src/kudu/tools/kudu-tool-test.cc@3313
PS2, Line 3313: "legacy_managed"
nit: maybe, create a constant for this character literal and use it in this 
scenario?


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/13314/2/src/kudu/tools/kudu-tool-test.cc@3317
PS2, Line 3317: legacy_external
ditto


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/13314/2/src/kudu/tools/kudu-tool-test.cc@3641
PS2, Line 3641: vector<pair<string, string>>(
nit: would it work without the explicit type here?



--
To view, visit http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/13314
To unsubscribe, visit http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/settings

Gerrit-Project: kudu
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit-MessageType: comment
Gerrit-Change-Id: If1b658ccb1186e4a238567b08dfbc00b0f2244f6
Gerrit-Change-Number: 13314
Gerrit-PatchSet: 2
Gerrit-Owner: Andrew Wong <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Adar Dembo <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Alexey Serbin <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Andrew Wong <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Hao Hao <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Kudu Jenkins (120)
Gerrit-Reviewer: Tidy Bot (241)
Gerrit-Comment-Date: Mon, 13 May 2019 17:51:43 +0000
Gerrit-HasComments: Yes

Reply via email to