Github user tomatophantastico commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel-membrane/pull/1#discussion_r130057536
--- Diff:
core/src/main/java/org/apache/metamodel/membrane/controllers/ColumnController.java
---
@@ -0,0 +1,86
GitHub user tomatophantastico opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/153
Collections instead of Arrays
This solves METAMODEL-7
This is a major API change, proceed with caution.
Lists are used in cases where order is important (schemas
Github user tomatophantastico commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/153#discussion_r130074475
--- Diff:
core/src/main/java/org/apache/metamodel/data/AbstractRowBuilder.java ---
@@ -68,7 +71,7 @@ public AbstractRowBuilder(Column[] columns
Github user tomatophantastico commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/153#discussion_r130073934
--- Diff: core/src/main/java/org/apache/metamodel/CompositeDataContext.java
---
@@ -190,9 +183,7 @@ public Schema getSchemaByNameInternal
Github user tomatophantastico commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/153
w.r.t. guavas Lists.newArrayList()
I think i used it mainly in the testcases, purely for syntactic convenience.
Internally ArrayLists should be used as it allows for more
Github user tomatophantastico commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/153
Sorry, this was more of the reasoning behind my bulk changes & the changes
in the (im)mutable table class, the implementor should of course pick what fits
the scenario
Github user tomatophantastico commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/153#discussion_r130074087
--- Diff:
core/src/main/java/org/apache/metamodel/DeleteAndInsertBuilder.java ---
@@ -103,7 +103,10 @@ private Row update(final Row original
Github user tomatophantastico commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/153#discussion_r130083327
--- Diff: core/src/main/java/org/apache/metamodel/convert/Converters.java
---
@@ -136,15 +135,19 @@ public static DataContext
Github user tomatophantastico commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/153
IIRC, guava is only in the test cases, so i would just set the scope to test
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub
Github user tomatophantastico closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/153
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so
GitHub user tomatophantastico reopened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/153
Collections instead of Arrays
This solves METAMODEL-7
This is a major API change, proceed with caution.
Lists are used in cases where order is important (schemas
Github user tomatophantastico commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/153
I manually rearranged the imports.
To make things easier improve quality i also created a checkstyle
integration in
https://github.com/tomatophantastico/metamodel/tree/feature
GitHub user tomatophantastico opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/149
Feature/jdbc composite relations
A fix for METAMODEL-1145.
The test might not be in the best location.
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running
GitHub user tomatophantastico opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/150
Feature/quote columns
Working on a problem similar to METAMODEL-1143 ,this is my solution for
HSQLDB and select queries.
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository
Github user tomatophantastico commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/148
Actually this should be slower than the previous solution as i removed the
join ordering and changed the way the filter/ join condition is evaluated.
Both made some assumptions
Github user tomatophantastico commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/148
I do not think the changes i proposed about a year ago were merged, as they
broke some tests. Or did i miss sth here?
The proposed change is still ~10 times faster, depending
Github user tomatophantastico commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/148
The previous method materializes the cartesian product and then filters it.
The proposed changes applies the filters in the during the joining.
---
If your project is set up
Github user tomatophantastico commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/150#discussion_r128903688
--- Diff: jdbc/src/test/java/org/apache/metamodel/jdbc/HsqldbTest.java ---
@@ -417,4 +418,98 @@ public void testInterpretationOfNull() throws
Github user tomatophantastico commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/150#discussion_r128903712
--- Diff:
jdbc/src/main/java/org/apache/metamodel/jdbc/dialects/DefaultQueryRewriter.java
---
@@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ public String
Github user tomatophantastico commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/150#discussion_r128903693
--- Diff: jdbc/src/test/java/org/apache/metamodel/jdbc/HsqldbTest.java ---
@@ -417,4 +418,98 @@ public void testInterpretationOfNull() throws
Github user tomatophantastico commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/150#discussion_r128903665
--- Diff: core/pom.xml ---
@@ -32,6 +32,10 @@ under the License.
slf4j-api
Github user tomatophantastico commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/148#discussion_r129790017
--- Diff: core/src/test/java/org/apache/metamodel/MetaModelHelperTest.java
---
@@ -115,21 +115,16 @@ public void testRightJoin() throws
Github user tomatophantastico commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/148
Imho, would not refer to utility classs in general as an anti-pattern, you
really have to look at it use-case dependent.
In this case however, i agree that Metamodelhelper
Github user tomatophantastico commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/148
Ok, this is literally meddling with the core of Metamodel.
I'll refactor this pull request, such that is as minimally invasive as
possible: The API doc also guarantees
Github user tomatophantastico commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/156#discussion_r131862601
--- Diff: core/src/main/java/org/apache/metamodel/UpdateSummaryBuilder.java
---
@@ -1,4 +1,5 @@
/**
+ * Licensed to the Apache
Github user tomatophantastico commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/156#discussion_r131862185
--- Diff: pom.xml ---
@@ -330,6 +330,27 @@ under the License
Github user tomatophantastico commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/156#discussion_r131896640
--- Diff: .travis.yml ---
@@ -10,12 +10,15 @@ before_install:
- sed -i.bak
s/dbms.security.auth_enabled=true/dbms.security.auth_enabled
Github user tomatophantastico commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/156#discussion_r131897104
--- Diff: style/checkstyle.xml ---
@@ -18,29 +18,47 @@ specific language governing permissions and limitations
under the License
Github user tomatophantastico commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/156
minimum set is a good idea. I used intellij idea and i am not to terribly
familiar with it yet, so this contributed to not so clean commits.
Can we collect some issues regarding
Github user tomatophantastico commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/156#discussion_r131868557
--- Diff: pom.xml ---
@@ -330,6 +330,27 @@ under the License
Github user tomatophantastico closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/154
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so
GitHub user tomatophantastico opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/156
Checkstyle integration
Integrates checkstyle into the maven test phase: so when ever mvn test is
called, checkstyle is run and fails on violations.
This should be subject
GitHub user tomatophantastico opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/154
Checkstyle intergration (and collections)
This pull is on top of pull request #153.
I opened a new pull request as this is technically a new feature, #153 is
however included
Github user tomatophantastico commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/156
More interestingly: Which rules should be employed?
What are the current rules?
Is a switch to google/sun rules an option?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply
Github user tomatophantastico commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/163
To me, there are two use cases / requirements here:
1. Make queries transferable
2. Ease of exploring a schema and its data via SQL
w.r.t 1)
Yes, i think
Github user tomatophantastico commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/163
IMHO: i prefer the query language to be free of "special constructs" as
much as possible.
I encoutered a similar problem as described in mm-1165 and my
Github user tomatophantastico commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/156
First, at this moment i do not see a merit in voting about complexity rules:
As long as there is no one out there who wants to do refactor those massive
amounts if code to fit those
Github user tomatophantastico commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/158
I found those "toString" test to be quite problematic too, even in small
tests and i encountered a lot of them during the arrays->collection conversion
and i would be happ
Github user tomatophantastico commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/178
wrt 1) no, not required. if you got a use case, then this is fine with me.
I just think, for getting the data from the value, you still need a lot of
domain knowledge. I just wondered
Github user tomatophantastico commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/178
Hi,
I am not sure, if i get the targeted use case here right, so intuitively i
would hesitate to use this MM module for querying the Kafka, because:
1) In Kafka
Github user tomatophantastico commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/178#discussion_r164433880
--- Diff:
kafka/src/test/java/org/apache/metamodel/kafka/KafkaDataContextTest.java ---
@@ -0,0 +1,172 @@
+/**
+ * Licensed
Github user tomatophantastico commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/metamodel/pull/178#discussion_r164483628
--- Diff:
kafka/src/test/java/org/apache/metamodel/kafka/KafkaDataContextTest.java ---
@@ -0,0 +1,172 @@
+/**
+ * Licensed
42 matches
Mail list logo
