Hey Ted, the first item you listed actually has straightforward work
around. It isn't elegant but you can use an ObjectHolder as a workspace
variable and then store whatever you want in it.

--
Jacques Nadeau
CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio

On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 9:16 PM, Ted Dunning <[email protected]> wrote:

> I started work on this an ran straight into the brick wall that UDAF's
> can't have arbitrary structures as workspaces.
>
> A secondary road-block was that UDAF's can't be made into multi-level
> aggregators.
>
> I can't fix these problems because, there isn't enough documentation.
>
> I moved on to the rest of the gazillion things I need to do but I would
> love to come back to this.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Jacques Nadeau <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > This is something that has been talked about multiple times but no one
> has
> > started work on it yet (as far as I know).
> >
> > Do you want to open a JIRA and maybe we can collaborate on getting
> > something put together. There are probably a couple of dependent jiras
> that
> > will need to be resolved but having a concrete and useful UDAF driving
> the
> > requirements may be just the motivation to get help on those dependent
> > JIRAs.
> >
> > --
> > Jacques Nadeau
> > CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio
> >
> > On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 9:07 PM, Mike Beddo <[email protected]
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > We are evaluating Drill for making interactive SQL queries against
> > > customer sales transaction data. Many of our queries involve computing
> > > "penetration" numbers: count of unique customers, count of unique
> > baskets,
> > > count of unique stores, etc. So far, using Drill to do aggregations
> > > involving COUNT, SUM, ... give acceptable query execution times. When
> > > including COUNT(DISTINCT <column>) in our queries, the execution times
> go
> > > from about 1 second to many minutes!
> > >
> > > Has someone written a user-defined aggregate function to do approximate
> > > counting? We think a Bloom filter will serve our needs best.
> > >
> > >
> > > -          Mike
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to