Mailing-List: contact reviews-help@impala.incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Message-Id: <201706050516.v555G3hH032008@ip-10-146-233-104.ec2.internal>
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2017 05:16:03 +0000
From: "Lars Volker (Code Review)" <gerrit@cloudera.org>
To: impala-cr@cloudera.com, reviews@impala.incubator.apache.org
CC: Jim Apple <jbapple-impala@apache.org>
Reply-To: lv@cloudera.com
Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?=5BImpala-ASF-CR=5D_IMPALA-3643/IMPALA-5344=3A_Fix_FE_tests_on_Java_8=0A?=
In-Reply-To: <gerrit.1496566826000.Iad8e1dccec3a51293a109c420bd2b88b9d1e0625@gerrit.cloudera.org>
References: <gerrit.1496566826000.Iad8e1dccec3a51293a109c420bd2b88b9d1e0625@gerrit.cloudera.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Gerrit/2.12.7
archived-at: Mon, 05 Jun 2017 05:16:10 -0000

Lars Volker has posted comments on this change.

Change subject: IMPALA-3643/IMPALA-5344: Fix FE tests on Java 8
......................................................................


Patch Set 2:

(6 comments)

Thank you for the review. Please see my inline comments and PS4.

http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/7073/2//COMMIT_MSG
Commit Message:

PS2, Line 10: replacing
> Did you use a script to do a global replace in fe or did you pick-and-choos
I picked the ones in files related to tests that were failing, and replaced those that occurred in loops or otherwise looked suspicious.


PS2, Line 10: LinkedHashMap
> I assume LinkedHashThing takes more memory than HashThing. Is this somethin
Yes, LinkedHashThing has two references for the linked list, so it takes a bit more space. In return, it provides faster iteration. Here are the sources of the Node element for HashMap and LinkedHashMap:

http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/jdk8/jdk/file/687fd7c7986d/src/share/classes/java/util/HashMap.java#l278
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/jdk8/jdk/file/687fd7c7986d/src/share/classes/java/util/LinkedHashMap.java#l192

I couldn't find benchmarks on the web, let me know if you think we should do one.


PS2, Line 13: a
> long line
Done


PS2, Line 13: Java 7 and Java 8
> OpenJDK or Oracle or both?
I ran tests for both, so I clarified it in the commit message.


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/7073/2/testdata/workloads/functional-planner/queries/PlannerTest/order.test
File testdata/workloads/functional-planner/queries/PlannerTest/order.test:

Line 694: |  pass-through-operands: all
> Are these plans functionally the same? If not, which one is better?
I suspect the new one is better, since it skips the extra materialization step. However, Taras may want to have a look at this since having less plans with non-all pass-through-operands may reduce coverage.


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/7073/2/testdata/workloads/functional-planner/queries/PlannerTest/tpch-nested.test
File testdata/workloads/functional-planner/queries/PlannerTest/tpch-nested.test:

Line 2411:    predicates on o: !empty(o.o_lineitems), o_orderstatus = 'F'
> Does this difference show up also in the execution? If so, should we pick o
My assumption was that we only do cost based ordering for join predicates and that normal conjuncts are evaluated on the materialized tuples as a whole.


-- 
To view, visit http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/7073
To unsubscribe, visit http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/settings

Gerrit-MessageType: comment
Gerrit-Change-Id: Iad8e1dccec3a51293a109c420bd2b88b9d1e0625
Gerrit-PatchSet: 2
Gerrit-Project: Impala-ASF
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit-Owner: Lars Volker <lv@cloudera.com>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Jim Apple <jbapple-impala@apache.org>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Lars Volker <lv@cloudera.com>
Gerrit-HasComments: Yes