hadoop-pig-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Vincent BARAT (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Commented: (PIG-1179) Consecutives ORDER BY on the same relation don't work
Date Fri, 22 Jan 2010 20:54:21 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-1179?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12803863#action_12803863

Vincent BARAT commented on PIG-1179:

Actually you are right, there was a typo. But it does not change the issue.
I'll try to give you a sample to reproduce it.
Have you tried it in local mode or clustered mode ? Maybe the issue is only present in clustered

> Consecutives ORDER BY on the same relation don't work
> -----------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: PIG-1179
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-1179
>             Project: Pig
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: 0.5.0
>            Reporter: Vincent BARAT
> It seems there is a bug in PIG when ORDER BY is used twice on the same relation using
> I have the following script:
> imei_start = FOREACH sessions GENERATE imei, start;
> imei_starts = GROUP imei_start BY imei;
> imei_retained_period = FOREACH imei_starts {
>   ordered_imei_start = ORDER imei_start BY start DESC;
>   first_start = LIMIT ordered_imei_start 1;
>   rev_ordered_imei_start = ORDER imei_start BY start ASC;
>   last_start = LIMIT rev_ordered_imei_start 1;
>   GENERATE group, ordered_imei_start, rev_ordered_imei_start;
> };
> ordered_imei_start and rev_ordered_imei_start are actually the same (they are both sorted
in the ASC way) and so last_start is always equal to first_start.
> If only one of the 2 ORDER BY is performed, there is no issue.

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

View raw message