[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SQOOP-1631?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14233090#comment-14233090
]
Masahiro Yamaguchi commented on SQOOP-1631:
-------------------------------------------
Thanks　for comment Jarek.
> it seems to me that the staging table parameter is not used there,
> so I would assume that users shouldn't be using the parameter -staging-table-name with
> PGBulkloadManager at all because it's a no-op, right?
Staging-table-name is not used in PGBulkloadManager but users need to set -staging-table-name.I'd
like to fix it.
> If that is correct, then the proper solution would be to either ignore this parameter
completely (unfortunate, but > we are doing that a lot in the Sqoop 1) or provide some
sort of parameter validation check directly in
> PGBulkloadManager that will detect if user used parameters that are not supported by
this special connector.
I think it trying to fix in the latter solution. Is that OK?
Please assign to me.
> Staging-table name check don't need using PGBulkloadManager
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SQOOP-1631
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SQOOP-1631
> Project: Sqoop
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: connectors/postgresql
> Affects Versions: 1.4.6
> Reporter: Masahiro Yamaguchi
> Attachments: SQOOP-1631_1.patch, SQOOP-1631_2.patch
>
>
> If we use PGBulkloadManager, the number of staging-tables equals number of map tasks.
> And staging-table's name is decided as follows.
> tmpTableName = table + "_" + context.getTaskAttemptID().toString();
> ExportTools check staging-table's name, but this check don't need using PGBulkloadManager.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
|