For anyone who finds this thread, I noticed that we also have a `replace`
method that does not use regex that will be able to provide the exact same
functionality without the copy. The modification I posted earlier works in
this case, but would not be useful for general purpose replace expressions.

Unfortunately "replace" is a considered SQL keyword by our parser, see [1]
, so to invoke the function you will have to put it in `backticks`.

The documentation does not seem to mention this function, so I will add
this to my JIRA to enhance the docs.

[1] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DRILL-1441

On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 11:22 AM, Jason Altekruse <[email protected]>
wrote:

> One thing you can do to speed up the expression evaluation is to use this
> expression instead of regex_replace. This will avoid copying each value
> into a short lived String object which unfortunately is the only interface
> available on the java regex library we are using within the function. We
> should probably look into updating these functions to try to avoid the
> extra copy.
>
> substring(dir0, strpos(dir0, '=') + 1)
>
> For now it would probably be best to include some common alternatives to
> simple regexes in the docs to help people avoid this slowdown when it isn't
> needed. I'll open a JIRA for this.
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 9:24 AM, John Omernik <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Aman - The reason I wanted to utilize the regex_replace was the use case
>> of
>> being able to take hive loaded and partitioned data, and present it to a
>> drill user without having them to understand the dir0, dir1 semantics.
>> Basically, a person using the data should be able to use the day='' that
>> they may be used to without having them grok and parse in their head what
>> dir0='day=2015-04-01' etc.   But you are correct, the view is only on the
>> hive created data, because I don't need the view in the Drill loaded data.
>> I appreciate the exchange on this, its very interesting and helpful to me
>> (and hopefully others) in understanding the underlying info.
>>
>> Jacques:  I will email you the profile directly, you can let the post here
>> know about the findings, but I would prefer the profile itself stay off
>> the
>> userlist (lots of names of specifics in the profile).
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 10:50 PM, Jacques Nadeau <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > John,
>> >
>> > Can you post your profile? We should confirm that pruning is working
>> > correctly and whether the time is being spent in planning or execution.
>> >
>> > thanks,
>> > Jacques
>> >
>> > --
>> > Jacques Nadeau
>> > CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio
>> >
>> > On Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 1:02 PM, John Omernik <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> > > So interestingly enough, this particular table doesn't have 4k files
>> in
>> > it,
>> > > it's actually pretty small, in that there is only 1 file per
>> partition.
>> > >  (tiny?)  Thus there are only 162 files vs. the 30 that drill created
>> > when
>> > > reprocessing the table. That probably doesn't help either given that
>> this
>> > > is such small data, the planning takes more time than query.  It's
>> cool
>> > > that the team is looking to improve this, I found the ability to just
>> > have
>> > > my data in Parquet partitioned by drill to be a huge win as well.  The
>> > > enhancements sound like they will enhance this even more, I would
>> love to
>> > > see as close to native drill loaded parquet performance as possible
>> with
>> > > Hive loaded tables, that would allow us to use drill to query, and
>> hive
>> > to
>> > > load. (Using complex transforms, longer running queries etc).
>> > >
>> > > I love drill :)
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Aman Sinha <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Hi John,
>> > > > the partition pruning *planning* time is indeed a function of the
>> > number
>> > > of
>> > > > files in the table. The execution time is only dependent on the
>> number
>> > of
>> > > > files in the specified partition.   In the Drill loaded Parquet
>> files
>> > you
>> > > > had 30 files whereas in the Hive loaded parquet files you probably
>> had
>> > > 162
>> > > > directories x 24 hours = about 4000 files  ? or somewhere in that
>> > > range...
>> > > >
>> > > > During the query planning phase, Drill partition pruning will load
>> the
>> > > full
>> > > > pathnames of the files in memory, including materializing the
>> > > partitioning
>> > > > columns such as 'day'  into memory and apply the `day` >=
>> '2015-01-01`
>> > > > filter.  It turns out this process is expensive when there are lots
>> of
>> > > > files even if they are spread out over multiple directories.   I
>> > believe
>> > > > there's an enhancement JIRA to make this process efficient by
>> loading
>> > > only
>> > > > directory names first and then the files...if not, I will create a
>> > JIRA.
>> > > >
>> > > > Note that partition pruning is still a huge win for more complex
>> > queries
>> > > > when the total execution time is substantially longer than the
>> planning
>> > > > time.  It is only for shorter running queries against large number
>> of
>> > > files
>> > > > where the planning times becomes more dominant.  There is ongoing
>> > effort
>> > > to
>> > > > improve that.
>> > > >
>> > > > Aman
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 10:15 AM, John Omernik <[email protected]>
>> > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > As a follow-up to Jacques email, I did some testing with Parquet
>> > files
>> > > > > created and partitioned by Apache Hive. (Not using the metastore
>> to
>> > > read
>> > > > > these files, just using the directories and reading the Parquet
>> files
>> > > > > directly).
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Consider that Hive's partition scheme makes directories that have
>> > > > > partitionfield=partitionvalue as the directory name like this:
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > table
>> > > > > ---day=2015-09-06
>> > > > > -------hour=00
>> > > > > -------hour=01
>> > > > > -------hour=02
>> > > > > ---day=2015-09-07
>> > > > > -------hour=00
>> > > > > -------hour=01
>> > > > > -------hour=02
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Basically in this case, to use hives partition directory scheme
>> (with
>> > > > > parquet and without the metastore)  you would have to write
>> queries
>> > > such
>> > > > > as:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > select * from table where dir0 >= 'day=2015-09-06' and dir1 =
>> > 'hour=01'
>> > > > >
>> > > > > or
>> > > > >
>> > > > > select * from table where dir0 = 'day=2015-09-06' and dir1 <
>> > 'hour=03'
>> > > > >
>> > > > > These are "doable" but are prone to user errors (what happens they
>> > put
>> > > a
>> > > > > space between hour, =, and the hour) are non intuitive (likes
>> become
>> > > more
>> > > > > complicated)  etc.
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > So what I did was use the regexp_replace function in Drill to
>> create
>> > a
>> > > > view
>> > > > > that instead of using dir0 or dir1 directly, I could just work
>> with
>> > the
>> > > > > "name" and the value... like this
>> > > > >
>> > > > > regexp_replace(dir0, 'day=', '') as `day`, regexp_replace(dir1,
>> > > 'hour=',
>> > > > > '') as `hour`
>> > > > >
>> > > > > That allowed me to use the Hive directories easily and
>> intuitively,
>> > > > without
>> > > > > changing the directories.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I will say that performance wasn't great compared to natively
>> loaded
>> > > > (drill
>> > > > > loaded) parquet files.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > For example, where I did one query on the hive data that was:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > select count(1)  from table where day >= '2015-01-01' using the
>> hive
>> > > > loaded
>> > > > > tables with drill and the drill view it took 26 seconds
>> > > > >
>> > > > > When I loaded the whole table into a new parquet (from the hive
>> view)
>> > > > table
>> > > > > in drill, and specified partition by `day`, `hour` the same query
>> ran
>> > > in
>> > > > > 1.08 seconds.  Not sure why this is, perhaps there is more work
>> the
>> > > drill
>> > > > > engine has to do, perhaps Hive isn't writing parquet file stats
>> well,
>> > > > > perhaps just more IO in that with the drill created table, there
>> was
>> > 30
>> > > > > files created, in the hive table there was at least 162 unique
>> > > partitions
>> > > > > (not even counting files) given the directory structure.  Another
>> > > example
>> > > > > of performance difference:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > select `day`, `hour` from drill_parquet_table where `day` >=
>> > > > '2015-01-01`:
>> > > > > 162 rows in 1.6 seconds
>> > > > >
>> > > > > select `day`, `hour` from hive_parquet_table where `day` >=
>> > > '2015-01-01`:
>> > > > > 162 rows in 27.2 seconds
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Interesting stuff, but the regex_replace does give partition
>> pruning
>> > > > based
>> > > > > on testing. I.e. on the hive table, select count(1) from hivetable
>> > > where
>> > > > > `day` >= '2015-01-01'  runs much faster than select count(1) from
>> > > > hivetable
>> > > > > where `day` >= '2014-01-01' indicating to me that is indeed not
>> > reading
>> > > > the
>> > > > > directories that were older than 2015-01-01 on the >= '2015-01-01'
>> > > query.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > * Note my observations are that of a drill rookie, so if drill
>> > experts
>> > > > have
>> > > > > any thoughts on what I wrote about my observations, I'd happily
>> > > defer.  I
>> > > > > would be interested in a drill expert commenting on the speed of
>> the
>> > > > Drill
>> > > > > loaded Parquet files vs Hive Loaded Parquet files, and if there is
>> > > > > something I can do make Hive loaded parquet less  doggy
>> > comparatively,
>> > > or
>> > > > > if that is just a function of more files to read.
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 4:48 PM, Jacques Nadeau <
>> [email protected]>
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > You can create a view that renames the columns to whatever you
>> > like.
>> > > > For
>> > > > > > example:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > CREATE VIEW mydata AS SELECT dir0 as "year", dir1 as "month",
>> dir2
>> > as
>> > > > > > "day", dir3 as "hour", a, b, ..., z FROM
>> > > `/warehouse/database/table/`
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Then you can query: select * from mydata where year = 2012
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > --
>> > > > > > Jacques Nadeau
>> > > > > > CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 2:35 PM, Grant Overby (groverby) <
>> > > > > > [email protected]>
>> > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > I’m using parquet files in hdfs. My files are stored thusly:
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > /warehouse/database/table/field0/field1/field2/field3/fileX.parquet
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > I’d like to give a name to field0..3 that could be used in
>> > queries
>> > > in
>> > > > > > > stead of dir0, dir1, dir2, dir3. Is this possible?
>> > > > > > > [
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> http://www.cisco.com/web/europe/images/email/signature/est2014/logo_06.png?ct=1398192119726
>> > > > > > > ]
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Grant Overby
>> > > > > > > Software Engineer
>> > > > > > > Cisco.com<http://www.cisco.com/>
>> > > > > > > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
>> > > > > > > Mobile: 865 724 4910
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > [http://www.cisco.com/assets/swa/img/thinkbeforeyouprint.gif]
>> > > Think
>> > > > > > > before you print.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > This email may contain confidential and privileged material
>> for
>> > the
>> > > > > sole
>> > > > > > > use of the intended recipient. Any review, use, distribution
>> or
>> > > > > > disclosure
>> > > > > > > by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
>> > > > recipient
>> > > > > > (or
>> > > > > > > authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the
>> > sender
>> > > > by
>> > > > > > > reply email and delete all copies of this message.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Please click here<
>> > > > > > >
>> > http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html
>> > > >
>> > > > > for
>> > > > > > > Company Registration Information.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
>

Reply via email to