[jira] [Commented] (TEZ-3512) Update EdgePlan proto for named edge
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TEZ-3512?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15768737#comment-15768737 ] Bikas Saha commented on TEZ-3512: - How can we be sure that SrcDest or DestSrc set by the AM will not conflict with an edge name set by the user? If we can be sure of that in the AM why can we not be sure of that in the client? What am I missing here? Clearly you seem to have something clear in your mind that I am missing. > Update EdgePlan proto for named edge > > > Key: TEZ-3512 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TEZ-3512 > Project: Apache Tez > Issue Type: Sub-task >Reporter: Zhiyuan Yang >Assignee: Zhiyuan Yang > Attachments: TEZ-3512.1.patch, TEZ-3512.2.patch > > > EdgePlan (protobuf) should have one more field for edge name. Related DAG > plan creation and parsing should be modified accordingly. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)
[jira] [Commented] (TEZ-3512) Update EdgePlan proto for named edge
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TEZ-3512?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15768629#comment-15768629 ] Zhiyuan Yang commented on TEZ-3512: --- Null name will be handled in AM, which will be in patch of TEZ-3513. Edge at AM side will know that user didn't specify edge name and then provide default names (source vertex name to destination vertex, or destination vertex name to source vertex). Dual default names is a must for 100% backward compatibility and is another reason for not assigning default name at client side. > Update EdgePlan proto for named edge > > > Key: TEZ-3512 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TEZ-3512 > Project: Apache Tez > Issue Type: Sub-task >Reporter: Zhiyuan Yang >Assignee: Zhiyuan Yang > Attachments: TEZ-3512.1.patch, TEZ-3512.2.patch > > > EdgePlan (protobuf) should have one more field for edge name. Related DAG > plan creation and parsing should be modified accordingly. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)
[jira] [Commented] (TEZ-3512) Update EdgePlan proto for named edge
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TEZ-3512?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15768614#comment-15768614 ] Bikas Saha commented on TEZ-3512: - I can see that in the patch :) But what will the value be for these null names? I ask because you made a valid point that any system generated names may collide with user defined names. In that case, it better to fail faster (on the client) than later (in the AM). This was not a problem earlier because there were no edge names. Hence we need to be clear about that now. > Update EdgePlan proto for named edge > > > Key: TEZ-3512 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TEZ-3512 > Project: Apache Tez > Issue Type: Sub-task >Reporter: Zhiyuan Yang >Assignee: Zhiyuan Yang > Attachments: TEZ-3512.1.patch, TEZ-3512.2.patch > > > EdgePlan (protobuf) should have one more field for edge name. Related DAG > plan creation and parsing should be modified accordingly. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)
[jira] [Commented] (TEZ-3512) Update EdgePlan proto for named edge
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TEZ-3512?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15768337#comment-15768337 ] Zhiyuan Yang commented on TEZ-3512: --- The solution is still using null for edges without name because they simply don't have a name and a default name is not necessary. > Update EdgePlan proto for named edge > > > Key: TEZ-3512 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TEZ-3512 > Project: Apache Tez > Issue Type: Sub-task >Reporter: Zhiyuan Yang >Assignee: Zhiyuan Yang > Attachments: TEZ-3512.1.patch, TEZ-3512.2.patch > > > EdgePlan (protobuf) should have one more field for edge name. Related DAG > plan creation and parsing should be modified accordingly. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)
[jira] [Commented] (TEZ-3512) Update EdgePlan proto for named edge
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TEZ-3512?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15765960#comment-15765960 ] Bikas Saha commented on TEZ-3512: - bq. Default value is inappropriate because any default value may also be used by user What is the solution to the problem then? Even in the AM we can pick a default value since the user may have specified that value as the edge name. Is that correct? If so, isnt it better to check for that on the client side and fail fast (instead of waiting for the job to run and then fail). Rest looks good to me. > Update EdgePlan proto for named edge > > > Key: TEZ-3512 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TEZ-3512 > Project: Apache Tez > Issue Type: Sub-task >Reporter: Zhiyuan Yang >Assignee: Zhiyuan Yang > Attachments: TEZ-3512.1.patch, TEZ-3512.2.patch > > > EdgePlan (protobuf) should have one more field for edge name. Related DAG > plan creation and parsing should be modified accordingly. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)
[jira] [Commented] (TEZ-3512) Update EdgePlan proto for named edge
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TEZ-3512?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15738699#comment-15738699 ] Bikas Saha commented on TEZ-3512: - When the DAG is being compiled on the client side, a default value could be provided to an edge between v1 and v2 if the edge name is null. In the tests, would be good to have a string s="edge2" and refer to that instead of hard coding "edge2" everywhere. > Update EdgePlan proto for named edge > > > Key: TEZ-3512 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TEZ-3512 > Project: Apache Tez > Issue Type: Sub-task >Reporter: Zhiyuan Yang >Assignee: Zhiyuan Yang > Attachments: TEZ-3512.1.patch > > > EdgePlan (protobuf) should have one more field for edge name. Related DAG > plan creation and parsing should be modified accordingly. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)
[jira] [Commented] (TEZ-3512) Update EdgePlan proto for named edge
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TEZ-3512?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15736582#comment-15736582 ] Zhiyuan Yang commented on TEZ-3512: --- [~bikassaha], would you mind giving a review? > Update EdgePlan proto for named edge > > > Key: TEZ-3512 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TEZ-3512 > Project: Apache Tez > Issue Type: Sub-task >Reporter: Zhiyuan Yang >Assignee: Zhiyuan Yang > Attachments: TEZ-3512.1.patch > > > EdgePlan (protobuf) should have one more field for edge name. Related DAG > plan creation and parsing should be modified accordingly. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)
