+1

I this this can be very useful. The only worry is of someone abusing it, so we 
probably should have a limit on the size of this? Not sure else it could be 
exposed and consumed.


Kunal Khatua

Engineering

[MapR]<http://www.mapr.com/>

www.mapr.com<http://www.mapr.com/>

________________________________
From: John Omernik <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 1, 2017 9:55:27 AM
To: user
Subject: Re: Discussion: Comments in Drill Views

Sorry, I let this idea drop (I didn't follow up and found when searching
for something else...)  Any other thoughts on this idea?

Should I open a JIRA if people think it would be handy?

On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 4:02 PM, Ted Dunning <[email protected]> wrote:

> This is very interesting.  I love docstrings in Lisp and Python and Javadoc
> in Java.
>
> Basically this is like that, but for SQL. Very helpful.
>
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 11:48 AM, John Omernik <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > I am looking for discussion here. A colleague was asking me how to add
> > comments to the metadata of a view.  (He's new to Drill, thus the idea of
> > not having metadata for a table is one he's warming up to).
> >
> > That got me thinking... why couldn't we use Drill Views to store
> > table/field comments?  This could be a great way to help add contextual
> > information for users. Here's some current observations when I issue a
> > describe view_myview
> >
> >
> > 1. I get three columns ,COLUMN_NAME, DATA_TYPE, and IS_NULLABLE
> > 2. Even thought the underlying parquet table has types, the view does not
> > pass the types for the underlying parquet files through.  (The type is
> ANY)
> > 3. The data for the view is all just a json file that could be easily
> > extended.
> >
> >
> > So, a few things would be a nice to have
> >
> > 1. Table comments.  when I issue a describe table, if the view has a
> > "Description" field, then having that print out as a description for the
> > whole view would be nice.  This is harder, I think because it's not just
> > extending the view information.
> >
> > 2. Column comments:  A text field that could be added to the view, and
> just
> > print out another column with description.  This would be very helpful.
> > While Drill being schemaless is awesome, the ability to add information
> to
> > known data, is huge.
> >
> > 3. Ability to to use the types from the Parquet files (without manually
> > specifying each type).  If we could provide an option to View creation to
> > attempt to infer type, that would be handy. I realize that folks are
> using
> > the LIMIT 0 to get metadata, but describe could be done well too.
> >
> > 4. Ability, using ANSI Sql to update the view column descriptions and the
> > description for the view itself.
> >
> > 5. I believe Avro has the ability to add this information to the files,
> so
> > if the data exists outside of views (such as in AVRO files) should we
> > present it to the user in describe table events as well?
> >
> > Curious if folks think this would be valuable, how much work an addition
> > like this would be to Drill, and other thoughts in general.
> >
> >
> > John
> >
>

Reply via email to