Note though that the decision on whether to push down the join is dependent on the cost of doing so relative to other options. I believe there are currently limitations in the costing model of the JDBC storage plugin that prevent the optimizer from choosing the "correct" plan in all cases.
But as Sudheesh noted, it would be good to capture your scenario in a Jira ticket. -- Zelaine On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 5:26 PM, Sudheesh Katkam <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Marcus, > > I am glad that you are exploring Drill! Per RDBMS storage plugin > documentation [1], join pushdown is supported. So the scenario you > described is likely a bug; can you open a ticket [2] with the details on > how to reproduce the issue? > > Thank you, > Sudheesh > > [1] https://drill.apache.org/docs/rdbms-storage-plugin/ < > https://drill.apache.org/docs/rdbms-storage-plugin/> > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DRILL < > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DRILL> > > > On Jul 15, 2016, at 1:48 PM, Marcus Rehm <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > I started to teste Drill and I'm very excited about the possibilities. > > > > By now I'm trying to map ours databases running on Oracle 11g. After try > > some queries I realized that the amount of time Drill takes to complete > is > > bigger than a general sql client takes. Looking the execution plan I saw > > (or understood) that Drill is doing the join of tables and is not pushing > > it down to the database. > > > > Is there any configuration required to it? How can I tell Drill to send > to > > Oracle the task of doing the join? > > > > Thanks in Advance. > > > > Best regards, > > Marcus Rehm > >
