hadoop-pig-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Shravan Matthur Narayanamurthy (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Commented: (PIG-161) Rework physical plan
Date Fri, 25 Apr 2008 15:51:55 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-161?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12592416#action_12592416

Shravan Matthur Narayanamurthy commented on PIG-161:

Replies to Pi's comments on incr5.patch:

Thanks for the comments Pi.
1) I initially designed it to be just a normal class with recursive functions. But I figured,
there are operators that need special handling and hence thought that instead of a long chain
of if/elses, the visitor pattern might suit well. I understand that it is a bit more expensive
but I thought it should not matter much given that the code is a bit more clearer. Do you
have any particular reasons that make it unsuitable here? Alan can you please check this one?

2) My fault. The setMapDoneMultiple & setMapDoneSingle are differenct in that one tests
against >0 and the against >1. I need to modify the setMapDone method to not have any

> Rework physical plan
> --------------------
>                 Key: PIG-161
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-161
>             Project: Pig
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>            Reporter: Alan Gates
>            Assignee: Alan Gates
>         Attachments: arithmeticOperators.patch, incr2.patch, incr3.patch, incr4.patch,
incr5.patch, MRCompilerTests_PlansAndOutputs.txt, Phy_AbsClass.patch, physicalOps.patch, physicalOps.patch,
podistinct.patch, pogenerate.patch, pogenerate.patch, pogenerate.patch, posort.patch
> This bug tracks work to rework all of the physical operators as described in http://wiki.apache.org/pig/PigTypesFunctionalSpec

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

View raw message