hadoop-pig-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Olga Natkovich (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Commented: (PIG-554) Fragment Replicate Join
Date Wed, 03 Dec 2008 22:33:44 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-554?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12653009#action_12653009

Olga Natkovich commented on PIG-554:

I ran tests and they all passed.

Here are some comments on the patch:

(1) New files should include apache header
(2) LOFRJoin.getSchema(): I don't think nonDuplicates computation would work for more than
two tables with the same column
(3) LOFRJoin.getTupleJoinColSchema(): has a comment saying:"This doesn't work with join by
complex type". Does this that FRJ does not work with columns of type Tuple? According to Alan,
tuple columns are supported in the case of regular join. I think it is ok if initial patch
does not support it but we should probably have a separate JIRA to track this issue.
(4) In the grammar, you made "replicated" to be token. I thought we would make it a string
so not to bloat the keyword space.
(5) I see that implementation seems to allow more than 2 tables but the test cases only cover
2 tables. I am fine if we initially only support 2 tables - I just wanted to clarify the intent
(6) Also, I ran explain on the following query and the results seems to have a separate map
step that I was not sure about:

A = load '/user/pig/tests/data/singlefile/student_data' as (name, age, gpa);
B = load '/user/pig/tests/data/singlefile/student_data' as (name, age, gpa);
C = JOIN A by name, age B by name, age USING replicated;
explain C;

| Map Reduce Plan                                |
MapReduce node olgan-Wed Dec 03 14:21:35 PST 2008-57
Map Plan
Store(/tmp/temp921697735/tmp-320517577:org.apache.pig.builtin.BinStorage) - olgan-Wed Dec
03 14:21:35 PST 2008-58
- olgan-Wed Dec 03 14:21:35 PST 2008-44--------
Global sort: false
MapReduce node olgan-Wed Dec 03 14:21:35 PST 2008-56
Map Plan
Store(fakefile:org.apache.pig.builtin.PigStorage) - olgan-Wed Dec 03 14:21:35 PST 2008-55
|---FRJoin[tuple] - olgan-Wed Dec 03 14:21:35 PST 2008-49
    |   |
    |   Project[bytearray][0] - olgan-Wed Dec 03 14:21:35 PST 2008-45
    |   |
    |   Project[bytearray][1] - olgan-Wed Dec 03 14:21:35 PST 2008-46
    |   |
    |   Project[bytearray][0] - olgan-Wed Dec 03 14:21:35 PST 2008-47
    |   |
    |   Project[bytearray][1] - olgan-Wed Dec 03 14:21:35 PST 2008-48
- olgan-Wed Dec 03 14:21:35 PST 2008-43--------
Global sort: false

> Fragment Replicate Join
> -----------------------
>                 Key: PIG-554
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-554
>             Project: Pig
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>    Affects Versions: types_branch
>            Reporter: Shravan Matthur Narayanamurthy
>            Assignee: Shravan Matthur Narayanamurthy
>             Fix For: types_branch
>         Attachments: frjofflat.patch
> Fragment Replicate Join(FRJ) is useful when we want a join between a huge table and a
very small table (fitting in memory small) and the join doesn't expand the data by much. The
idea is to distribute the processing of the huge files by fragmenting it and replicating the
small file to all machines receiving a fragment of the huge file. Because of the availability
of the entire small file, the join becomes a trivial task without needing any break in the
pipeline. Exhaustive test have done to determine the improvement we get out of FRJ. Here are
the details: http://wiki.apache.org/pig/PigFRJoin
> The patch makes changes to parts of the code where new operators are introduced. Currently,
when a new operator is introduced, its alias is not set. For schema computation I have modified
this behaviour to set the alias of the new operator to that of its predecessor. The logical
side of the patch mimics the cogroup behavior as join syntax closely resembles that of cogroup.
Currently, this patch doesn't have support for joins other than inner joins. The rest of the
code has been documented.

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

View raw message