Hi Todd, Is there any issue already known if I use a wide table in Kudu, such as a table with 1000+ columns? Or which kinds of problem may occur in your estimation?
Thanks, Zhen 2017-06-19 4:22 GMT+08:00 Todd Lipcon <[email protected]>: > Hi Jan, > > I don't believe anyone is currently working on expanding the limitation. > > If you are willing to live on the edge, it is possible to use > --unlock-unsafe-flags and bump the limit to a higher number. However, you > may run into performance or stability issues, since you are entering a > realm of usage that has no testing or real world usage, so if you do hit an > issue, you'll probably be on your own to diagnose and debug the problem. > > There are a few things in flight (eg Hao is working on reducing the number > of fsyncs when writing blocks) which may help the issue, but until we've > expanded testing coverage, we don't want to recommend users operate past > these limits. > > -Todd > > > > > On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 12:35 PM, Jan Holmberg <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Anyone? I find 300 columns pretty strict limitation for analytical >> tables. I'd liked to know if wider tables are on the roadmap. >> >> -jan >> >> > On 16 Jun 2017, at 21.56, Jan Holmberg <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> > Hi, >> > I ran into Kudu limitation of max columns (300). Same limit seemed to >> apply latest Kudu version as well but not ex. Impala/Hive (in the same >> extent at least). >> > * is this limitation going to be loosened in near future? >> > * any suggestions how to get over this limitation? Table splitting is >> the obvious one but in my case not the desired solution. >> > >> > cheers, >> > -jan >> >> > > > -- > Todd Lipcon > Software Engineer, Cloudera >
