Awesome :) Thanks a lot..

On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 10:26 PM, Jonathan Coveney <[email protected]>wrote:

> Haha, when I say naive I don't mean bad... plenty of my scripts use that
> approach, and often it's unavoidable, so it's good to understand.
>
> as far as the naming issue, when you flatten it is usually a good idea to
> give the resultant columns a name. so your example would become:
>
>
> A = load 'one.txt' as (a:int, b:int);
> B = load 'two.txt' as (a:int, b:int);
> A_1 = foreach A generate flatten(TOTUPLE(a,b)) as (a,b);
> B_1 = foreach B generate flatten(TOTUPLE(a,b)) as (x,y);
> C = join A_1 by a full, B_1 by x;
> describe C
>
> That will get rid of the org.apache.pig.builtin.totuple_b etc. But let's
> say that you still want them to have the same name, you can do that:
>
>
> A = load 'one.txt' as (a:int, b:int);
> B = load 'two.txt' as (a:int, b:int);
> A_1 = foreach A generate flatten(TOTUPLE(a,b)) as (a,b);
> B_1 = foreach B generate flatten(TOTUPLE(a,b)) as (a,b);
> C = join A_1 by a full, B_1 by a;
> describe C
>
> And in the join result, you can disambiguate A_1::a and B_1::a, and so on.
>
> 2012/4/19 Rajgopal Vaithiyanathan <[email protected]>
>
> > I knew it would sound naive :P I didn't even know a schema parser
> exists.!
> >
> > `it can only return a tuple, which you then flatten into columns.`
> >
> >
> > Isn't this bad..?   For example see this, ( for simplicity i'm using
> > TOTUPLE instead of my UDF.. )
> >
> > A = load 'one.txt' as (a:int, b:int);
> > B = load 'two.txt' as (a:int, b:int);
> > A_1 = foreach A generate flatten(TOTUPLE(a,b));
> > B_1 = foreach B generate flatten(TOTUPLE(a,b));
> > C = join A_1 by a full, B_1 by a;
> > describe C
> >
> > The schema description is like this.
> >
> > C: {A_1::org.apache.pig.builtin.totuple_b_18::a:
> > int,A_1::org.apache.pig.builtin.totuple_b_18::b:
> > int,B_1::org.apache.pig.builtin.totuple_b_19::a:
> > int,B_1::org.apache.pig.builtin.totuple_b_19::b: int}
> >
> > and totuple_b_** in the description obviously changes every time  i
> > describe because it is based on a counter....
> > Now how do i disambiguate between The A_1's a,b and B_1's a,b ?
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Jonathan Coveney <[email protected]
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > Dmitriy's suggestion is spot on, but just to be pedantic, you'd do:
> > >
> > > public Schema outputSchema(Schema input) {
> > >   List<FieldSchema> list = new ArrayList<FieldSchema>();
> > >   list.add(new FieldSchema("one", DataType.CHARARRAY));
> > >   list.add(new FieldSchema("two", DataType.CHARARRAY))
> > >
> > >    return new Schema(new Schema.FieldSchema("t", new Schema(list),
> > > DataType.TUPLE));
> > > }
> > >
> > > That said, in your question you asked: "how can you get it without the
> > > parenthesis." Short answer is that you can't. A UDF can't return
> multiple
> > > columns -- it can only return a tuple, which you then flatten into
> > columns.
> > >
> > > 2012/4/18 Dmitriy Ryaboy <[email protected]>
> > >
> > > > It's messy. Easier to use the schema parser:
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> org.apache.pig.impl.util.Utils.getSchemaFromString("t:tuple(len:int,word:chararray)");
> > > >
> > > > Even easier to use the @OutputSchema annotation (coming in 0.11 I
> > > believe)
> > > >
> > > > -D
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 7:02 PM, Rajgopal Vaithiyanathan
> > > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > Hey all,
> > > > >
> > > > > Sorry if i  sound naive, but how should one implement outputSchema
> of
> > >  an
> > > > > eval Func that returns tuple.
> > > > > The way i do it is ,
> > > > >
> > > > > public Schema outputSchema(Schema input) {
> > > > >    List<FieldSchema> list = new ArrayList<FieldSchema>();
> > > > >    list.add(new FieldSchema("one", DataType.CHARARRAY));
> > > > >    list.add(new FieldSchema("two", DataType.CHARARRAY))
> > > > >
> > > > >    return new Schema(list);
> > > > > }
> > > > >
> > > > > but in the front end, If i use
> > > > >  B = foreach A generate flatten(FUNC());
> > > > >  describe B
> > > > > I get the schema like this:
> > > > >    { ( one:chararray, two:chararray ) }
> > > > > Now i use a flatten on this like :
> > > > >    B = foreach A generate flatten(FUNC());
> > > > >  and i get { null::one : chararray, null::two : chararray }
> > > > >
> > > > > The question is,
> > > > > How should i implement the outputSchema so that i get the schema
> > like {
> > > > one
> > > > > : chararray, two : chararray }  // NOTE: without the parenthesis
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > Raj :)
> >
>



-- 
Thanks and Regards,
Rajgopal Vaithiyanathan.

Reply via email to