Re: Function name change: contains() -> string-contains()

her had is not keyword free and so each time we introduce a > new > one, we create a backwards compatibility problem. It seems that for AQL > using a > function-based syntax would create fewer problems. > > Cheers, > Till > > On 2 Mar 2016, at 18:25, Taewoo Kim wrote: >

Re: Function name change: contains() -> string-contains()

d stay as a SQL++ > builtin function (like Oracle SQL). > Thanks! > > Best, > Yingyi > > On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 2:40 PM, Taewoo Kim <wangs...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > @Yingyi: Yes. It's just a syntactic sugar - it can be anything: > > "contains_text&quo

Re: Function name change: contains() -> string-contains()

fulltext search in > SQL++, probably using the same functions like Oracle. If the AQL fulltext > syntax is translated into fulltext functions by the language translator, we > can easily support them in SQL++. > > Best, > Yingyi > > > On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 2:20 PM, Taewo

Re: Function name change: contains() -> string-contains()

/1j6_YSCc_8gEReAWFP84geI30wlnsz7uMFq4TCm7GRz8/edit?usp=sharing MySQL: match(), against() Oracle: contains(), catsearch(), matches() MongoDB: $text AsterixDB: follows XQuery spec(e.g., $o.title *contains text* "hello") Best, Taewoo On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 2:07 PM, Taewoo Kim <wangs...@gmail.com> wrote: > There

Re: Function name change: contains() -> string-contains()

ill...@lambda.nu> wrote: > Making "text" a reserved word seems like a more breaking change than the > function names, doesn't it? > > Ceej > aka Chris Hillery > > On Sep 15, 2016 1:57 PM, "Taewoo Kim" <wangs...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Reminder: &g

Re: Function name change: contains() -> string-contains()

e. Here are more details about this change: On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 6:25 PM, Taewoo Kim <wangs...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello All, > > I would like to suggest a current function name change. I am currently > working on Full Text Search features. XQuery Full-text search spec [1]

Re: Creating RTree: no space left

n Wail and I talked F2F - his data has a > lot of duplicate points, so maybe something goes awry in that case. I > wonder if we've sufficiently tested that case? (E.g., what if there are > gazillions of records originating from a small handful of points?) > > > On 8/26/16 9:55 AM

Re: How to set the lsm component size?

On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 4:10 PM, Mike Carey <dtab...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 > > > > On 9/12/16 3:42 PM, Taewoo Kim wrote: > >> It would be really helpful this conversation can be applied in the >> description of each parameter. Currently, I think that

Re: How to set the lsm component size?

It would be really helpful this conversation can be applied in the description of each parameter. Currently, I think that is too short. Best, Taewoo On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Jianfeng Jia wrote: > Clear. Thanks. > > And Ian’s parameters works. I can have a

Re: Creating RTree: no space left

Based on a rough calculation, per partition, each point field takes 3.6GB (16 bytes * 2887453794 records / 12 partition). To sort 3.6GB, we are generating 625 files (96MB or 128MB each) = 157GB. Since Wail mentioned that there was no issue when creating a B+ tree index, we need to check what SORT

Re: index-only plans

@Chen, @Till: Thanks. I will try. Best, Taewoo On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 10:55 PM, Chen Li <che...@gmail.com> wrote: > I am always a big fan of separating a big merge into multiple small > changes. It will be good to do this "partitioning." > > Chen > > On Th

The configuration file (asterix-configuration.xml) now supports multiples of the unit byte.

Hello All, As https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1569 states, you can use multiples of the unit byte (e.g., KB, MB, GB ...) to specify a byte value in the following parameters in the configuration file. You can check out the current master codebase to apply the changes. You can also

Re: index-only plans

Thanks Till for reviewing this giant patch set. At this moment, what I can try to do is removing all necessary test cases and changes that are related to full-text search preparation (changing the function name of "contains" to "string-contains") since I thought this index-only plan branch could

Re: Debugging source code

@Michael: it's good to know this. I will try and let you know. Best, Taewoo On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 9:25 AM, Michael Blow wrote: > I have a change propose to Gerrit which enables debugging the generated > functions by way of the original java files: > >

A question regarding RecoverIT

Hello All, I'm trying to add a test case for RecoverIT. When I check the query directory, I found that there is not a corresponding 'result' directory for some test cases. For example, primary_plus_rtree_index test cases in

Re: Errors, exceptions, and error codes

Got it. Thanks! Best, Taewoo On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 1:30 PM, Till Westmann <ti...@apache.org> wrote: > There’s not example so far. I think/hope that we’ll see one in one of > Abdullah’s bug fixes :) > > > On 15 Jul 2016, at 13:16, Taewoo Kim wrote: > > It's a

Re: Errors, exceptions, and error codes

It's a great idea. Can you show us a before/after example that you have replaced already in your branch if there is any? Best, Taewoo On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 11:50 AM, Till Westmann wrote: > Hi, > > triggered by a recent bug fix that required an non-trivial error >

Re: questions about index-only change

e the knowledge. > > Chen > > On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 1:43 PM, Yingyi Bu <buyin...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Cool, thanks a lot, Taewoo! > > > > Best, > > Yingyi > > > > On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 1:36 PM, Taewoo Kim <wangs...@gmail.com> wrote: >

<    1   2