AFAIK, for MongoDB plugin, we have very limited tests.
Anyway, I tried the following query on your sample json file:
0: jdbc:drill:schema=dfs.tpchPar100> select t1.c1.text, count(t1.c1.text)
from (select flatten(tbl.twitter_entities.hashtags) as c1 from
dfs.`/jsondata/junk.json` as tbl) t1 group
If you disable jdbc plugin, they won't appear.
Unfortunately when jdbc plugin is enabled, new rule is
added ProjectRemoveRules.class.
This rule removes Project stage but for implicit columns it's crucial as
Project is responsible for making them implicit.
Kind regards
Arina
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 a
Hi Arina,
Yes, we do have a jdbc plugin enabled. The extra fields appear on CSVs,
parquets created from CSV files etc and not just limited to files queries
through the jdbc plugin.
Regards,
Rahul
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 7:58 PM, Arina Yelchiyeva <
arina.yelchiy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Rahul,
Hi Rahul,
I guess you are querying data using Jdbc plugin, if yes, then it is a bug
(please see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DRILL-4903).
Other than that case, as far as I know, Drill doesn't return implicit
columns in select star query.
I am not sure if there is a way to disable it witho
>From Drill 1.7, a select star query returns some implicit file columns(like
FQN,fileName,filePath,suffix). I could not find a documentation related to
this. This feature has been added with the commit
https://github.com/apache/drill/pull/491.
Can someone explain why it is required? Is there any w
Can you share the jdbc connection string and the error you see in the
drillbit.log file ?
On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 2:58 PM, wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> I am getting an error when I am invoking drill jdbc code from apache
> tomcat server. The same piece of code is executing fine while connecting it
> from
Hi,
I am getting an error when I am invoking drill jdbc code from apache tomcat
server. The same piece of code is executing fine while connecting it from
standalone java class. Can u help me with this issue?
Thanks and regards
Vittal Surya Lakshya
Bangalore
The information contained in t
Hi Aman,
Sorry for delayed response, since we are executing this query on our ~150GB
logs and as i have mentioned in trail mail, by executing "removed
conditions alone" CTAS got executed successfully, so i don't know which
sample data i should share(since i don't know pattern)?
Can you tell me in
