Alexey Serbin has posted comments on this change. ( 
http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/16596 )

Change subject: [partitioning] KUDU-2671: Support for range specific 
HashSchemas.
......................................................................


Patch Set 1:

(8 comments)

http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/16596/1/src/kudu/common/partition.h
File src/kudu/common/partition.h:

http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/16596/1/src/kudu/common/partition.h@149
PS1, Line 149: integer
> right now it's useless, but the idea was to replace the integer with the up
I guess it would be enough to have just the lower bound for a range given that 
we don't allow ranges to intersect, right?

Also, why is it 'int', not 'std::string' as the type of the 
Partition::partition_key_start_ member field would imply?


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/16596/1/src/kudu/common/partition.cc
File src/kudu/common/partition.cc:

http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/16596/1/src/kudu/common/partition.cc@366
PS1, Line 366: partitions
> nit: not your fault, but IMO it makes it more difficult to read to use 'par
+1


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/16596/1/src/kudu/common/partition.cc@398
PS1, Line 398:       RETURN_NOT_OK(EncodeRangeBounds(range_bounds, schema, 
&bounds));
             :       RETURN_NOT_OK(EncodeRangeSplits(split_rows, schema, 
&splits));
             :       RETURN_NOT_OK(SplitRangeBounds(schema, std::move(splits), 
&bounds));
> If we don't have any 'split_rows', then the number of bounds would be known
style nit: it seems there three lines has shifted right; what might be the 
reason?


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/16596/1/src/kudu/common/partition.cc@410
PS1, Line 410: vector<Partition> current_bound_hash_partitions = 
vector<Partition>(1);
nit: a shorter form might be
  vector<Partition> current_bound_hash_partitions(1);


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/16596/1/src/kudu/common/partition.cc@669
PS1, Line 669: string PartitionSchema::HashSchemaPerPartitionDebugString(const 
Partition& partition,
             :                                                           const 
vector<HashBucketSchema>& range_hash_schema,
             :                                              const Schema& 
schema) const {
style nit: the parameters are not aligned properly


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/16596/1/src/kudu/common/partition.cc@675
PS1, Line 675:
nit: reserving the space for 'components' might be a good idea; I guess here 
it'd be

  components.reserve(hash_bucket_schemas_.size() + 1);


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/16596/1/src/kudu/common/partition.cc@686
PS1, Line 686: use default HashSchema when no range-specific hash partitions 
are provided
style nit: in comments like this, in Kudu code we tend to use full sentences, 
i.e. it should start with a capital letter and end with a period (dot).


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/16596/1/src/kudu/common/partition.cc@695
PS1, Line 695: hash_buckets_[i]
How is it guaranteed that partition.hash_buckets_ has enough elements to have 
index 'i' to be in the bounds of the container?



--
To view, visit http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/16596
To unsubscribe, visit http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/settings

Gerrit-Project: kudu
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit-MessageType: comment
Gerrit-Change-Id: I8725f4bd072a81b05b36dfc7df0c074c172b4ce8
Gerrit-Change-Number: 16596
Gerrit-PatchSet: 1
Gerrit-Owner: Mahesh Reddy <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Alexey Serbin <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Andrew Wong <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Bankim Bhavsar <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Grant Henke <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Kudu Jenkins (120)
Gerrit-Reviewer: Mahesh Reddy <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Comment-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 23:09:37 +0000
Gerrit-HasComments: Yes

Reply via email to