db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Thomas Nielsen <Thomas.Niel...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: DERBY-581 and OLAP operations
Date Fri, 20 Jul 2007 06:51:40 GMT
Hi Bryan,

I'll join in on this effort with the limited Derby experience I have!

We should now be three, so there is truly some interest in this 

I also agree that we should start with a subset of the functionallity as 
suggested, and plug the rest in at a later stage.

Seems like you have a very sensible approach laid out :)


Bryan Pendleton wrote:
> In the context of https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-581
> I've been studying the SQL-99 standard's specification of
> OLAP operations:
>  - Feature T611 specifies "Elementary OLAP operations"
>  - Feature T612 specifies "Advanced OLAP operations"
> I'm interested in exploring an implementation of these features,
> and to start with I'd like to get the community's reaction:
>  - Are these features that we're interested in seeing added to Derby?
>  - Are there others in the community who are interested in
>    working on these features?
>  - How could we approach this incrementally, building enough
>    functionality to be useful, arriving at a complete
>    implementation in pieces over time? For example, would it be
>    reasonable to build a subset of the T611 features at first,
>    and then expand that functionality over time? Would it be
>    reasonable to add new SQL syntax support, but have it work
>    only in a subset of cases, and then expand the execution
>    functionality over time to address more usages?
> I was thinking that I might get started by trying to build
> one or more Wiki pages that describe some of the materials
> that might go into an implementation:
>  - background information about the features and the
>    concepts behind them
>  - notes about the current Derby implementation, and about
>    possible ways to extend the implementation in this area
>  - ideas for how to subdivide and stage the implementation,
>    in order to enable us to start talking about actual code.
> Does this seem like a reasonable approach?


> thanks,
> bryan

Thomas Nielsen

View raw message