[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1762) AQL+ needs to be revised.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1762?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15829372#comment-15829372 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1762: --- Step 1 of 2 done: Add a new rule controller.

[jira] [Closed] (ASTERIXDB-1208) ngram tokenizer failure with negative length

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1208?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Taewoo Kim closed ASTERIXDB-1208. - Resolution: Fixed https://asterix-gerrit.ics.uci.edu/#/c/1448/ > ngram tokenizer failure

[jira] [Closed] (ASTERIXDB-1435) Massive operators will induce a heap error that should not be.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1435?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Taewoo Kim closed ASTERIXDB-1435. - Resolution: Fixed https://asterix-gerrit.ics.uci.edu/#/c/1056/ > Massive operators will

[jira] [Closed] (ASTERIXDB-1766) Address comments in full-text implementation step 3

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1766?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Taewoo Kim closed ASTERIXDB-1766. - Resolution: Fixed https://asterix-gerrit.ics.uci.edu/#/c/1422/ > Address comments in

[jira] [Closed] (ASTERIXDB-1663) The memory consumption of Hash Table used in Hash-Join is not controlled.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1663?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Taewoo Kim closed ASTERIXDB-1663. - Resolution: Fixed https://asterix-gerrit.ics.uci.edu/#/c/1056/ > The memory consumption of

[jira] [Closed] (ASTERIXDB-1556) Hash Table used by External hash group-by doesn't conform to the budget.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1556?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Taewoo Kim closed ASTERIXDB-1556. - Resolution: Fixed > Hash Table used by External hash group-by doesn't conform to the budget.

[jira] [Closed] (ASTERIXDB-1733) Hash Table used by hash-join doesn't conform to the budget.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1733?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Taewoo Kim closed ASTERIXDB-1733. - Resolution: Fixed > Hash Table used by hash-join doesn't conform to the budget. >

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1762) AQL+ needs to be revised.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1762?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15799669#comment-15799669 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1762: --- More information:

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1762) AQL+ needs to be revised.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1762?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15794148#comment-15794148 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1762: --- Got that. For the future references, I am posting my

[jira] [Comment Edited] (ASTERIXDB-1762) AQL+ needs to be revised.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1762?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15793875#comment-15793875 ] Taewoo Kim edited comment on ASTERIXDB-1762 at 1/3/17 4:55 AM: --- My

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1762) AQL+ needs to be revised.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1762?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15793875#comment-15793875 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1762: --- My thought on two parts: AQLPlus.jj file: Clearly, it

[jira] [Created] (ASTERIXDB-1762) AQL+ needs to be revised.

Taewoo Kim created ASTERIXDB-1762: - Summary: AQL+ needs to be revised. Key: ASTERIXDB-1762 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1762 Project: Apache AsterixDB Issue Type:

[jira] [Created] (ASTERIXDB-1761) Default compiler.joinmemory setting: 5 frames is enough when excluding big object test cases

Taewoo Kim created ASTERIXDB-1761: - Summary: Default compiler.joinmemory setting: 5 frames is enough when excluding big object test cases Key: ASTERIXDB-1761 URL:

[jira] [Assigned] (ASTERIXDB-1751) Some of spilled partition files are not deleted properly after the optimized hybrid hash join finishes.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1751?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Taewoo Kim reassigned ASTERIXDB-1751: - Assignee: Taewoo Kim > Some of spilled partition files are not deleted properly

[jira] [Created] (ASTERIXDB-1751) Some of spilled partition files are not deleted properly after the optimized hybrid hash join finishes.

Taewoo Kim created ASTERIXDB-1751: - Summary: Some of spilled partition files are not deleted properly after the optimized hybrid hash join finishes. Key: ASTERIXDB-1751 URL:

[jira] [Created] (ASTERIXDB-1748) More enhanced Data Skew Handling during a join would be nice to have.

Taewoo Kim created ASTERIXDB-1748: - Summary: More enhanced Data Skew Handling during a join would be nice to have. Key: ASTERIXDB-1748 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1748

[jira] [Closed] (ASTERIXDB-1743) Hash Join on 9-node is slower than conducting the same join on 1-node.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1743?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Taewoo Kim closed ASTERIXDB-1743. - Resolution: Invalid > Hash Join on 9-node is slower than conducting the same join on 1-node.

[jira] [Closed] (ASTERIXDB-1746) Excessive new byte[] array constructions during record writes using RecordBuilder.write()

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1746?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Taewoo Kim closed ASTERIXDB-1746. - Resolution: Fixed > Excessive new byte[] array constructions during record writes using >

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1746) Excessive new byte[] array constructions during record writes using RecordBuilder.write()

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1746?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15727095#comment-15727095 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1746: --- Fixed: toByteArray() was changed to getByteArray(). One

[jira] [Created] (ASTERIXDB-1746) Excessive new byte[] array constructions during record writes using RecordBuilder.write()

Taewoo Kim created ASTERIXDB-1746: - Summary: Excessive new byte[] array constructions during record writes using RecordBuilder.write() Key: ASTERIXDB-1746 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1746

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1733) Hash Table used by hash-join doesn't conform to the budget.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1733?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15720598#comment-15720598 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1733: --- I think we can apply the similar logic that we used for

[jira] [Created] (ASTERIXDB-1743) Hash Join on 9-node is slower than conducting the same join on 1-node.

Taewoo Kim created ASTERIXDB-1743: - Summary: Hash Join on 9-node is slower than conducting the same join on 1-node. Key: ASTERIXDB-1743 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1743

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1733) Hash Table used by hash-join doesn't conform to the budget.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1733?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15718817#comment-15718817 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1733: --- Like the ASTERIXDB-1566 case, When the build phase of

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1736) Grace Hash Join and Hybrid Hash Join are not being used.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1736?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15718805#comment-15718805 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1736: --- Typo fix: Hybrid Hash Join was not removed while Grace

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1736) Grace Hash Join and Hybrid Hash Join are not being used.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1736?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15698708#comment-15698708 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1736: --- Removed Grace Hash Join. > Grace Hash Join and Hybrid

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1736) Grace Hash Join and Hybrid Hash Join are not being used.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1736?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15696727#comment-15696727 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1736: --- Discussed this issue with [~buyingyi]. His point:

[jira] [Created] (ASTERIXDB-1736) Grace Hash Join and Hybrid Hash Join are not being used.

Taewoo Kim created ASTERIXDB-1736: - Summary: Grace Hash Join and Hybrid Hash Join are not being used. Key: ASTERIXDB-1736 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1736 Project: Apache

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1556) Hash Table used by External hash group-by doesn't conform to the budget.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1556?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15672016#comment-15672016 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1556: --- Discussion with [~dtabass] and [~che...@gmail.com]:

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1733) Hash Table used by hash-join doesn't conform to the budget.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1733?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15656196#comment-15656196 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1733: --- Related to the issue ASTERIXDB-1566, the hash table

[jira] [Resolved] (ASTERIXDB-1727) Adding grouping hint breaks the query

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1727?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Taewoo Kim resolved ASTERIXDB-1727. --- Resolution: Fixed Hash hint will be ignored by the system (currently we can't support

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1556) Hash Table used by External hash group-by doesn't conform to the budget.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1556?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15648730#comment-15648730 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1556: --- Talked this with [~che...@gmail.com]. Let me think how

[jira] [Assigned] (ASTERIXDB-1733) Hash Table used by hash-join doesn't conform to the budget.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1733?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Taewoo Kim reassigned ASTERIXDB-1733: - Assignee: Taewoo Kim > Hash Table used by hash-join doesn't conform to the budget. >

[jira] [Created] (ASTERIXDB-1733) Hash Table used by hash-join doesn't conform to the budget.

Taewoo Kim created ASTERIXDB-1733: - Summary: Hash Table used by hash-join doesn't conform to the budget. Key: ASTERIXDB-1733 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1733 Project: Apache

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1556) Hash Table used by External hash group-by doesn't conform to the budget.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1556?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15648355#comment-15648355 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1556: --- I think pre-reserving the space for every tuple that

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1556) Hash Table used by External hash group-by doesn't conform to the budget.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1556?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15645756#comment-15645756 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1556: --- I'm now working on this idea: Let the D and H share the

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1727) Adding grouping hint breaks the query

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1727?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15638111#comment-15638111 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1727: --- During the optimization, the given group-by logical

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1556) Hash Table used by External hash group-by doesn't conform to the budget.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1556?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15626898#comment-15626898 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1556: --- Talked with [~buyingyi]: two options - 1) split M into

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1556) Hash Table used by External hash group-by doesn't conform to the budget.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1556?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15626626#comment-15626626 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1556: --- Talked with [~che...@gmail.com]: since Hash Table and

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1556) Hash Table used by External hash group-by doesn't conform to the budget.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1556?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15624517#comment-15624517 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1556: --- Yes. Sporadic test failure happens on the new code

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1556) Hash Table used by External hash group-by doesn't conform to the budget.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1556?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15624229#comment-15624229 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1556: --- Currently, this Deallocatable Frame Pool class is being

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1556) Hash Table used by External hash group-by doesn't conform to the budget.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1556?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15624139#comment-15624139 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1556: --- I am collecting the number for Sort-group by now. >

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1556) Hash Table used by External hash group-by doesn't conform to the budget.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1556?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15622822#comment-15622822 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1556: --- The performance comparison between the master branch

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1704) Fuzzy-join query is slow

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1704?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15602550#comment-15602550 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1704: --- For the same query with the different threshold (0.8)

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1704) Fuzzy-join query is slow

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1704?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15601154#comment-15601154 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1704: --- OOM fix is still under the review. So, if you just

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1704) Fuzzy-join query is slow

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1704?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15600842#comment-15600842 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1704: --- We can try that. > Fuzzy-join query is slow >

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1704) Fuzzy-join query is slow

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1704?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15600510#comment-15600510 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1704: --- 2 partitions per node: each partition resides on a

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1704) Fuzzy-join query is slow

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1704?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15600506#comment-15600506 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1704: --- [~lwhay], the reason might be the hash-group by patch.

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1704) Fuzzy-join query is slow

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1704?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15598598#comment-15598598 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1704: --- For the same query with the different threshold (0.9)

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1704) Fuzzy-join query is slow

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1704?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15598403#comment-15598403 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1704: --- For 200k dataset, the following query

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1704) Fuzzy-join query is slow

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1704?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15598398#comment-15598398 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1704: --- >From [~lwhay]: At my first glance, I partially agree

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1704) Fuzzy-join query is slow

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1704?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15597309#comment-15597309 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1704: --- For 200k dataset, equi-join ($o.reviewText =

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1704) Fuzzy-join query is slow

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1704?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15597140#comment-15597140 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1704: --- >From [~dtabass]: To put some brackets on what to

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1704) Fuzzy-join query is slow

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1704?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15596676#comment-15596676 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1704: --- AmazonReview, 200K records, reviewText, Jaccard,

[jira] [Created] (ASTERIXDB-1704) Fuzzy-join query is slow

Taewoo Kim created ASTERIXDB-1704: - Summary: Fuzzy-join query is slow Key: ASTERIXDB-1704 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1704 Project: Apache AsterixDB Issue Type: Bug

[jira] [Closed] (ASTERIXDB-1700) edit-distance-check on the fields with the 2-gram and the 3-gram index generates a null pointer exception.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1700?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Taewoo Kim closed ASTERIXDB-1700. - Resolution: Fixed Still, there is one issue. But the chances are low that the following error

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1700) edit-distance-check on the fields with the 2-gram and the 3-gram index generates a null pointer exception.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1700?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15592566#comment-15592566 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1700: --- In summary, there are two issues: 1) the same type of

[jira] [Assigned] (ASTERIXDB-1700) edit-distance-check on the fields with the 2-gram and the 3-gram index generates a null pointer exception.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1700?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Taewoo Kim reassigned ASTERIXDB-1700: - Assignee: Taewoo Kim (was: Jianfeng Jia) > edit-distance-check on the fields with

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1700) edit-distance-check on the fields with the 2-gram and the 3-gram index generates a null pointer exception.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1700?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15592330#comment-15592330 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1700: --- A 2-gram index on the search predicate field can be

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1700) edit-distance-check on the fields with the 2-gram and the 3-gram index generates a null pointer exception.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1700?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15590865#comment-15590865 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1700: --- Yes. It runs well. It took me some time to reproduce

[jira] [Created] (ASTERIXDB-1700) edit-distance-check on the fields with the 2-gram and the 3-gram index generates a null pointer exception.

Taewoo Kim created ASTERIXDB-1700: - Summary: edit-distance-check on the fields with the 2-gram and the 3-gram index generates a null pointer exception. Key: ASTERIXDB-1700 URL:

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1700) edit-distance-check on the fields with the 2-gram and the 3-gram index generates a null pointer exception.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1700?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15590529#comment-15590529 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1700: --- Another issue: I think conducting the 2-gram index

[jira] [Updated] (ASTERIXDB-1700) edit-distance-check on the fields with the 2-gram and the 3-gram index generates a null pointer exception.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1700?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Taewoo Kim updated ASTERIXDB-1700: -- Description: If there multiple indexes on the same field, we use intersect operator to

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1675) All functions can not be found

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1675?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15549594#comment-15549594 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1675: --- Shouldn't we post this trick to the asterix-users and

[jira] [Created] (ASTERIXDB-1663) The memory consumption of Hash Table used in Hash-Join is not controlled.

Taewoo Kim created ASTERIXDB-1663: - Summary: The memory consumption of Hash Table used in Hash-Join is not controlled. Key: ASTERIXDB-1663 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1663

[jira] [Closed] (ASTERIXDB-1081) RemoveUnusedAssignAndAggregateRule bug - removes a variable that is used

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1081?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Taewoo Kim closed ASTERIXDB-1081. - Resolution: Fixed > RemoveUnusedAssignAndAggregateRule bug - removes a variable that is used

[jira] [Closed] (ASTERIXDB-1246) Unnecessary decor variables of a group-by are not removed until PushProjectDownRule is fired.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1246?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Taewoo Kim closed ASTERIXDB-1246. - Resolution: Fixed > Unnecessary decor variables of a group-by are not removed until >

[jira] [Closed] (ASTERIXDB-1086) IntroduceProjectsRule creates a wrong PROJECT operator when there are multiple paths.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1086?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Taewoo Kim closed ASTERIXDB-1086. - Resolution: Fixed > IntroduceProjectsRule creates a wrong PROJECT operator when there are >

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1556) Hash Table used by External hash group-by doesn't conform to the budget.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1556?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15499768#comment-15499768 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1556: --- @[~buyingyi]: If we assume that each field consists of

[jira] [Comment Edited] (ASTERIXDB-1639) Need a spatial test case with a high point dup factor

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1639?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15480237#comment-15480237 ] Taewoo Kim edited comment on ASTERIXDB-1639 at 9/10/16 6:45 PM: You

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1639) Need a spatial test case with a high point dup factor

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1639?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15480237#comment-15480237 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1639: --- You assigned to this to right guy even if he lacks some

[jira] [Closed] (ASTERIXDB-1628) The number of partitions in External Hash-Groupby is calculated improperly for smaller data size.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1628?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Taewoo Kim closed ASTERIXDB-1628. - Resolution: Fixed > The number of partitions in External Hash-Groupby is calculated

[jira] [Comment Edited] (ASTERIXDB-1487) Fuzzy select-join on inverted index poses inconsistent results.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1487?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15475341#comment-15475341 ] Taewoo Kim edited comment on ASTERIXDB-1487 at 9/8/16 11:26 PM: What's

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1487) Fuzzy select-join on inverted index poses inconsistent results.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1487?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15475341#comment-15475341 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1487: --- What's the main issue here? > Fuzzy select-join on

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1556) Hash Table used by External hash group-by doesn't conform to the budget.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1556?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15475100#comment-15475100 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1556: --- Agreed. > Hash Table used by External hash group-by

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1556) Hash Table used by External hash group-by doesn't conform to the budget.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1556?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15475098#comment-15475098 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1556: --- Agreed. > Hash Table used by External hash group-by

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1556) Hash Table used by External hash group-by doesn't conform to the budget.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1556?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15475096#comment-15475096 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1556: --- Another discussion with [~buyingyi] regarding the hash

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1628) The number of partitions in External Hash-Groupby is calculated improperly for smaller data size.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1628?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15459716#comment-15459716 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1628: --- After having a discussion with [~che...@gmail.com] and

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1628) The number of partitions in External Hash-Groupby is calculated improperly for smaller data size.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1628?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15459537#comment-15459537 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1628: --- [~che...@gmail.com] suggested another simple idea: if

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1628) The number of partitions in External Hash-Groupby is calculated improperly for smaller data size.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1628?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15459530#comment-15459530 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1628: --- The current code calculates the number of partitions

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1628) The number of partitions in External Hash-Groupby is calculated improperly for smaller data size.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1628?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15458993#comment-15458993 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1628: --- The slide 8 and 9 of the following presentation might

[jira] [Updated] (ASTERIXDB-1628) The number of partitions in External Hash-Groupby is calculated improperly for smaller data size.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1628?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Taewoo Kim updated ASTERIXDB-1628: -- Labels: soon (was: ) > The number of partitions in External Hash-Groupby is calculated

[jira] [Created] (ASTERIXDB-1628) The number of partitions in External Hash-Groupby is calculated improperly for smaller data size.

Taewoo Kim created ASTERIXDB-1628: - Summary: The number of partitions in External Hash-Groupby is calculated improperly for smaller data size. Key: ASTERIXDB-1628 URL:

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1088) handleCompactStatement() in AqlTranslator.java has a bug

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1088?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15442734#comment-15442734 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1088: --- This has not been fixed yet. Based on Young-Seok's

[jira] [Closed] (ASTERIXDB-1077) Inverted index tests are slow compared to others

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1077?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Taewoo Kim closed ASTERIXDB-1077. - Resolution: Fixed Assignee: Taewoo Kim (was: Chen Li) > Inverted index tests are slow

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1186) Index Join Hint on an index with composite keys causes query to return incorrect results

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1186?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15429157#comment-15429157 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1186: --- I have uploaded a patch set:

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1186) Index Join Hint on an index with composite keys causes query to return incorrect results

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1186?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15427581#comment-15427581 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1186: --- Sure. The common part is "composite PK". But, this is

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-920) Wrong results for a primary index with composite keys

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-920?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15427573#comment-15427573 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-920: -- 1186 is about exchange. This is about false positive

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1186) Index Join Hint on an index with composite keys causes query to return incorrect results

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1186?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15427356#comment-15427356 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1186: --- The result on the current master is Interesting: the

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1234) Currently allowing (and botching) non-atomic field comparisons

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1234?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15427279#comment-15427279 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1234: --- Got it. Thanks. > Currently allowing (and botching)

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1246) Unnecessary decor variables of a group-by are not removed until PushProjectDownRule is fired.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1246?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15427256#comment-15427256 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1246: --- This is part of index-only change and is uploaded as a

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1234) Currently allowing (and botching) non-atomic field comparisons

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1234?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15427252#comment-15427252 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1234: --- I vaguely remember [~buyingyi] did some work on null

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1186) Index Join Hint on an index with composite keys causes query to return incorrect results

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1186?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15427237#comment-15427237 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1186: --- https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-920 and

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1086) IntroduceProjectsRule creates a wrong PROJECT operator when there are multiple paths.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1086?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15427229#comment-15427229 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1086: --- This is part of index-only change and is uploaded as a

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-866) Incorrect query results possible when accessing secondary indexes

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-866?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15427211#comment-15427211 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-866: -- We may need to apply this approach - apply DISTINCT after

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-920) Wrong results for a primary index with composite keys

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-920?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15425666#comment-15425666 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-920: -- [~amoudi], can you take over this issue and fix this?

[jira] [Issue Comment Deleted] (ASTERIXDB-1435) Massive operators will induce a heap error that should not be.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1435?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Taewoo Kim updated ASTERIXDB-1435: -- Comment: was deleted (was: These two issues are actually the same issue.) > Massive

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1435) Massive operators will induce a heap error that should not be.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1435?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15425618#comment-15425618 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1435: --- These two issues are actually the same issue. >

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1556) Hash Table used by External hash group-by doesn't conform to the budget.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1556?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15425608#comment-15425608 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1556: --- [~dtabass] suggested an idea for garbage collection and

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-579) Allow asterix-configuration properties to be specified in user-friendly units

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-579?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15425470#comment-15425470 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-579: -- Yes. This issue is fixed. > Allow asterix-configuration

[jira] [Commented] (ASTERIXDB-1556) Hash Table used by External hash group-by doesn't conform to the budget.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1556?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15422073#comment-15422073 ] Taewoo Kim commented on ASTERIXDB-1556: --- I like that idea. However, for the compatibility

<    1   2   3   4   >