hadoop-pig-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Santhosh Srinivasan (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Commented: (PIG-158) Rework logical plan
Date Thu, 20 Mar 2008 21:55:25 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-158?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12580941#action_12580941

Santhosh Srinivasan commented on PIG-158:


See my replies inline with [Santhosh]. Thanks for the comments.

1) How do you maintain relations between LOs and dependencies in the abstract graph layer
(OperatorPlan) in the same time?

[Santhosh] This will be part of the parser changes if I am not mistaken.

2) mSortFunc in LOSort is declared as LOUserFunc. If I use a built-in sort, it will still
be LOUserFunc. When we do optimization built-in funcs and UDFs are treated differently so
I think here you should declare a more generic type.

[Santhosh] I agree that UDFs and bulit-in functions will probably be treated differently.
I need to think about this.

3) LOCogroup seems only define inputs, how to specify columns to be grouped?

[Santhosh] Shravan had a similar comment (See comment #4 in his review). I have the columns
in the group/cogroup as a list of logical operators. The inputs are part of the logical plan
and are not attributes of LOCogroup.


> Rework logical plan
> -------------------
>                 Key: PIG-158
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-158
>             Project: Pig
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>          Components: impl
>            Reporter: Alan Gates
>            Assignee: Alan Gates
>         Attachments: logical_operators.patch
> Rework the logical plan in line with http://wiki.apache.org/pig/PigExecutionModel

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

View raw message