You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@asterixdb.apache.org by Eldon Carman <ec...@ucr.edu> on 2016/01/26 01:47:30 UTC
Round Tripping ADM Interval Data
The interval field value printed in the ADM results can not be used to
create an interval.
Intervals have several functions that are used to construct an interval:
interval-from-date/time/datetime
and interval-start-from-date/time/datetime. It appears that this is the
only way to create an interval. Thus, a user must use one of these function
to create an interval.
The following query shows how to create three intervals.
Query:
let $di := {"date-interval": interval-from-date("2012-01-01", "2013-04-01")}
let $ti := {"time-interval": interval-from-time("12:23:34.456Z",
"233445567+0800")}
let $dti := {"datetime-interval":
interval-from-datetime("2012-01-01T12:23:34.456+08:00",
"20130401T153445567Z")}
return [$di, $ti, $dti];
Result:
{ "date-interval": interval-date("2012-01-01, 2013-04-01") }, {
"time-interval": interval-time("12:23:34.456Z, 15:34:45.567Z") }, {
"datetime-interval": interval-datetime("2012-01-01T04:23:34.456Z,
2013-04-01T15:34:45.567Z") } ]
Notice the results show interval-date("date, date") which is different than
the functions that are used to create a date interval. Notice that
interval-date does not exists in AsterixDB and that the input is a single
string of dates separated by a comma. Below are some ideas on how to create
a round-trip for intervals.
Options for round tripping:
a: Rename "interval-from-date" to "interval-date" and update the output to
put both dates in quotes.
b: Add alias for "interval-from-date" to "interval-date" and update the
output to put both dates in quotes.
c: Create an interval date constructor (called interval-date) that can
parse the string "date, date".
The same process should be used for intervals with time and datetime.
Thoughts?
Re: Round Tripping ADM Interval Data
Posted by Till Westmann <ti...@apache.org>.
+1
On 31 Jan 2016, at 16:41, Mike Carey wrote:
> Removal seems fine/cleaner to me...!
>
> On 1/31/16 10:19 AM, Eldon Carman wrote:
>> I submitted a code review for the external (phase 1) changes. The
>> change
>> includes a interval constructor that takes two arguments of the same
>> type.
>> For example:
>>
>> let $v1 := interval(date("2013-01-01"), date("20130505"))
>> let $v2 := interval(time("00:01:01"), time("213901049+0800"))
>> let $v3 := interval(datetime("2013-01-01T00:01:01"),
>> datetime("20130505T213901049+0800"))
>> return { "v1": $v1, "v2": $v2, "v3": $v3 }
>>
>>
>> Do we want to keep the previous functions for declaring an interval?
>> The
>> these functions are unique for each interval type and support string
>> arguments in addition to the specific type (date, time, datetime).
>>
>> let $v1 := interval-from-date(date("2013-01-01"), date("20130505"))
>> let $v2 := interval-from-time(time("00:01:01"),
>> time("213901049+0800"))
>> let $v3 := interval-from-datetime(datetime("2013-01-01T00:01:01"),
>> datetime("20130505T213901049+0800"))
>> return { "v1": $v1, "v2": $v2, "v3": $v3 }
>>
>> They could be helpful, but I am don't think they are necessary.
>> Removing
>> them would consolidate the code path for intervals. Thoughts?
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 12:15 AM, Mike Carey <dt...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> +1 on all points below! :-)
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1/28/16 11:00 PM, Till Westmann wrote:
>>>> Sounds good to me. It will change the binary representation of
>> intervals, so it’s not backwards compatible.
>>>> But it seems that the tag-first representation is the way it should
>>>> have
>> been anyway and it’s a better way to go forward to support more
>> generic
>> intervals. (And I prefer layout changes rather now than later ..)
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Till
>>>>
>>>> On 28 Jan 2016, at 21:46, Eldon Carman wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Based on the discussion, I have suggestion for a two phase
>>>>> approach to
>>>>> support generic intervals.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Phase 1: External
>>>>> The first phase will focus on areas seen by a user, either though
>>>>> ADM or
>>>>> AQL. The new format will also be open to supporting other interval
>> types,
>>>>> although currently will only support date, time and datetime. Here
>>>>> are a
>>>>> few of the action items:
>>>>>
>>>>> - ADM printer and parser changed to support the new generic style
>>>>> format
>>>>> - interval(date("2012-01-01”), date(”2013-04-01”))
>>>>> - Add an interval AQL constructor to support the above format
>>>>> - Alter interval byte structure to support any interval type
>>>>> - byte tag, T start, T end
>>>>> - where T is currently only date, time and datetime
>>>>>
>>>>> I created a ticket to track status for Phase 1:
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1281
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Phase 2: Internal
>>>>> Phase two will focus on items under the hood. These items are only
>>>>> seen
>> by
>>>>> a developer and need to be update to support new interval types.
>>>>> The
>>>>> complete task list will require some investigation. In addition to
>> picking
>>>>> what types of intervals should be supported.
>>>>>
>>>>> Phase 1 can start immediately while Phase 2 can wait until needed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Eldon Carman <ec...@ucr.edu>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> While its a little more work to implement up front, the following
>> format
>>>>>> would be generic and support alternate interval types in the
>>>>>> future. It
>>>>>> would be nice to have consistency between AQL and ADM, although
>>>>>> not
>>>>>> required.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> interval(date("2012-01-01”), date(”2013-04-01”))
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As we move to supporting generic intervals, the byte storage
>>>>>> format
>> will
>>>>>> need to be updated. Currently an interval is represented by:
>>>>>> start
>> (long),
>>>>>> end (long), type tag (byte). To support other types, the type tag
>> should be
>>>>>> at the beginning of the byte sequence. This way the tag can be
>>>>>> used to
>>>>>> determine the data length of each item in the interval.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Should the changes to AQL and ADM include this interval storage
>>>>>> change
>>>>>> (moving the type tag to the first byte of the interval storage
>>>>>> format)?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 12:42 PM, Till Westmann
>>>>>> <ti...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>>>>>> That’s actually a nice and generic serialization.
>>>>>>> I think that we should do this similarly in ADM and AQL.
>>>>>>> I.e. instead of using
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> interval-from-date("2012-01-01”, ”2013-04-01”)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (note the two parameters) in AQL and
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> interval-date("2012-01-01, 2013-04-01")
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (not the single parameter) in ADM we should use
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> interval(date("2012-01-01”), date(”2013-04-01”))
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> for both. That would have a number of advantages:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1) It is consistent between AQL and ADM.
>>>>>>> 2) It is consistent with the JSON serialization.
>>>>>>> 3) It reduces the number of magic parsers.
>>>>>>> 4) It keeps the interval orthogonal to the type used in the
>>>>>>> interval.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 4): While we don’t support intervals of other types than
>>>>>>> date,
>> time,
>>>>>>> and datetime so far, I think that we should change that and so
>>>>>>> this
>> would
>>>>>>> be a good step in that direction as well.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The disadvantages are
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1) Incompatible AQL change
>>>>>>> 2) Incompatible ADM change
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> Till
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 26 Jan 2016, at 11:46, Eldon Carman wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I found that the lossless-JSON and clean-JSON printers were not
>>>>>>> being
>>>>>>>> used.
>>>>>>>> After connecting them to the respective JSON printer, I ran the
>>>>>>>> query
>>>>>>>> again.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> lossless-JSON result:
>>>>>>>> { "orderedlist": [ { "date-interval": { "interval": { "start":
>>>>>>>> {
>> "date":
>>>>>>>> "2012-01-01" }, "end": { "date": "2013-04-01" }}} }, {
>> "time-interval": {
>>>>>>>> "interval": { "start": { "time": "12:23:34.456Z" }, "end": {
>>>>>>>> "time":
>>>>>>>> "15:34:45.567Z" }}} }, { "datetime-interval": { "interval": {
>> "start": {
>>>>>>>> "datetime": "2012-01-01T04:23:34.456Z" }, "end": { "datetime":
>>>>>>>> "2013-04-01T15:34:45.567Z" }}} } ] }
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> clean-JSON result:
>>>>>>>> [ { "date-interval": { "interval": { "start": "2012-01-01",
>>>>>>>> "end":
>>>>>>>> "2013-04-01"}} }, { "time-interval": { "interval": { "start":
>>>>>>>> "12:23:34.456Z", "end": "15:34:45.567Z"}} }, {
>>>>>>>> "datetime-interval": {
>>>>>>>> "interval": { "start": "2012-01-01T04:23:34.456Z", "end":
>>>>>>>> "2013-04-01T15:34:45.567Z"}} } ]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is this what you would have expected?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 7:07 PM, Eldon Carman
>>>>>>>> <ec...@ucr.edu>
>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Thanks Chris for adding a fourth option. This option would
>>>>>>>>> focus our
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> updates to only the ADM output.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yes, both lossless-JSON and clean-JSON outputs would need to
>>>>>>>>> be
>> check
>>>>>>>> also.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 5:58 PM, Chris Hillery
>> <ch...@hillery.land>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I would vote for:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> d. Update the serialized format to output
>>>>>>>>>> "interval-from-date" and
>> put
>>>>>>>>> both
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> dates in quotes.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I like the function name interval-from-date() better, and I
>>>>>>>>>> don't
>> think
>>>>>>>>>> there's any need to maintain backwards compatibility with the
>>>>>>>>>> old
>> name
>>>>>>>>>> which clearly never worked.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Couple thoughts, though: The serialized format really should
>>>>>>>>>> be
>> "ADM",
>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "AQL". As such I don't think it should reference functions at
>>>>>>>>> all.
>> We
>>>>>>>>>> already do this for many datatypes, such as uuid("...") and
>>>>>>>>>> datetime("..."). Are those truly "Functions"? Are they
>> "constructors",
>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> is that different? In any case, the answer for interval types
>> should be
>>>>>>>>>> consistent with that.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Final note: quite possibly the lossless-JSON and clean-JSON
>> outputs for
>>>>>>>>>> intervals are broken as well, and should be fixed.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Ceej
>>>>>>>>>> aka Chris Hillery
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Till Westmann
>>>>>>>>>> <ti...@apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Voting for a. Seems to be the least redundant option.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>>> Till
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 25 Jan 2016, at 16:47, Eldon Carman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The interval field value printed in the ADM results can not
>>>>>>>>>>> be
>> used to
>>>>>>>>>>>> create an interval.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Intervals have several functions that are used to construct
>>>>>>>>>>>> an
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> interval:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> interval-from-date/time/datetime
>>>>>>>>>>>> and interval-start-from-date/time/datetime. It appears that
>>>>>>>>>>>> this
>> is
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> only way to create an interval. Thus, a user must use one of
>>>>>>>>> these
>>>>>>>>>>>> function
>>>>>>>>>>>> to create an interval.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The following query shows how to create three intervals.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Query:
>>>>>>>>>>>> let $di := {"date-interval":
>>>>>>>>>>>> interval-from-date("2012-01-01",
>>>>>>>>>>>> "2013-04-01")}
>>>>>>>>>>>> let $ti := {"time-interval":
>>>>>>>>>>>> interval-from-time("12:23:34.456Z",
>>>>>>>>>>>> "233445567+0800")}
>>>>>>>>>>>> let $dti := {"datetime-interval":
>>>>>>>>>>>> interval-from-datetime("2012-01-01T12:23:34.456+08:00",
>>>>>>>>>>>> "20130401T153445567Z")}
>>>>>>>>>>>> return [$di, $ti, $dti];
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Result:
>>>>>>>>>>>> { "date-interval": interval-date("2012-01-01, 2013-04-01")
>>>>>>>>>>>> }, {
>>>>>>>>>>>> "time-interval": interval-time("12:23:34.456Z,
>>>>>>>>>>>> 15:34:45.567Z")
>> }, {
>>>>>>>>>>>> "datetime-interval":
>>>>>>>>>>>> interval-datetime("2012-01-01T04:23:34.456Z,
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2013-04-01T15:34:45.567Z") } ]
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Notice the results show interval-date("date, date") which
>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>> different
>>>>>>>>>>>> than
>>>>>>>>>>>> the functions that are used to create a date interval.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Notice
>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>> interval-date does not exists in AsterixDB and that the
>>>>>>>>>>>> input is
>> a
>>>>>>>>>>> single
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> string of dates separated by a comma. Below are some ideas on
>>>>>>>>> how to
>>>>>>>>>>>> create
>>>>>>>>>>>> a round-trip for intervals.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Options for round tripping:
>>>>>>>>>>>> a: Rename "interval-from-date" to "interval-date" and
>>>>>>>>>>>> update the
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> output to
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> put both dates in quotes.
>>>>>>>>>>>> b: Add alias for "interval-from-date" to "interval-date"
>>>>>>>>>>>> and
>> update
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> output to put both dates in quotes.
>>>>>>>>>>>> c: Create an interval date constructor (called
>>>>>>>>>>>> interval-date)
>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>>>>> parse the string "date, date".
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The same process should be used for intervals with time and
>> datetime.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
Re: Round Tripping ADM Interval Data
Posted by Mike Carey <dt...@gmail.com>.
Removal seems fine/cleaner to me...!
On 1/31/16 10:19 AM, Eldon Carman wrote:
> I submitted a code review for the external (phase 1) changes. The change
> includes a interval constructor that takes two arguments of the same type.
> For example:
>
> let $v1 := interval(date("2013-01-01"), date("20130505"))
> let $v2 := interval(time("00:01:01"), time("213901049+0800"))
> let $v3 := interval(datetime("2013-01-01T00:01:01"),
> datetime("20130505T213901049+0800"))
> return { "v1": $v1, "v2": $v2, "v3": $v3 }
>
>
> Do we want to keep the previous functions for declaring an interval? The
> these functions are unique for each interval type and support string
> arguments in addition to the specific type (date, time, datetime).
>
> let $v1 := interval-from-date(date("2013-01-01"), date("20130505"))
> let $v2 := interval-from-time(time("00:01:01"), time("213901049+0800"))
> let $v3 := interval-from-datetime(datetime("2013-01-01T00:01:01"),
> datetime("20130505T213901049+0800"))
> return { "v1": $v1, "v2": $v2, "v3": $v3 }
>
> They could be helpful, but I am don't think they are necessary. Removing
> them would consolidate the code path for intervals. Thoughts?
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 12:15 AM, Mike Carey <dt...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> +1 on all points below! :-)
>>
>>
>> On 1/28/16 11:00 PM, Till Westmann wrote:
>>> Sounds good to me. It will change the binary representation of
> intervals, so it’s not backwards compatible.
>>> But it seems that the tag-first representation is the way it should have
> been anyway and it’s a better way to go forward to support more generic
> intervals. (And I prefer layout changes rather now than later ..)
>>> Cheers,
>>> Till
>>>
>>> On 28 Jan 2016, at 21:46, Eldon Carman wrote:
>>>
>>>> Based on the discussion, I have suggestion for a two phase approach to
>>>> support generic intervals.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Phase 1: External
>>>> The first phase will focus on areas seen by a user, either though ADM or
>>>> AQL. The new format will also be open to supporting other interval
> types,
>>>> although currently will only support date, time and datetime. Here are a
>>>> few of the action items:
>>>>
>>>> - ADM printer and parser changed to support the new generic style format
>>>> - interval(date("2012-01-01”), date(”2013-04-01”))
>>>> - Add an interval AQL constructor to support the above format
>>>> - Alter interval byte structure to support any interval type
>>>> - byte tag, T start, T end
>>>> - where T is currently only date, time and datetime
>>>>
>>>> I created a ticket to track status for Phase 1:
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1281
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Phase 2: Internal
>>>> Phase two will focus on items under the hood. These items are only seen
> by
>>>> a developer and need to be update to support new interval types. The
>>>> complete task list will require some investigation. In addition to
> picking
>>>> what types of intervals should be supported.
>>>>
>>>> Phase 1 can start immediately while Phase 2 can wait until needed.
>>>>
>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Eldon Carman <ec...@ucr.edu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> While its a little more work to implement up front, the following
> format
>>>>> would be generic and support alternate interval types in the future. It
>>>>> would be nice to have consistency between AQL and ADM, although not
>>>>> required.
>>>>>
>>>>> interval(date("2012-01-01”), date(”2013-04-01”))
>>>>>
>>>>> As we move to supporting generic intervals, the byte storage format
> will
>>>>> need to be updated. Currently an interval is represented by: start
> (long),
>>>>> end (long), type tag (byte). To support other types, the type tag
> should be
>>>>> at the beginning of the byte sequence. This way the tag can be used to
>>>>> determine the data length of each item in the interval.
>>>>>
>>>>> Should the changes to AQL and ADM include this interval storage change
>>>>> (moving the type tag to the first byte of the interval storage format)?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 12:42 PM, Till Westmann <ti...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>>>>>> That’s actually a nice and generic serialization.
>>>>>> I think that we should do this similarly in ADM and AQL.
>>>>>> I.e. instead of using
>>>>>>
>>>>>> interval-from-date("2012-01-01”, ”2013-04-01”)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (note the two parameters) in AQL and
>>>>>>
>>>>>> interval-date("2012-01-01, 2013-04-01")
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (not the single parameter) in ADM we should use
>>>>>>
>>>>>> interval(date("2012-01-01”), date(”2013-04-01”))
>>>>>>
>>>>>> for both. That would have a number of advantages:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) It is consistent between AQL and ADM.
>>>>>> 2) It is consistent with the JSON serialization.
>>>>>> 3) It reduces the number of magic parsers.
>>>>>> 4) It keeps the interval orthogonal to the type used in the interval.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 4): While we don’t support intervals of other types than date,
> time,
>>>>>> and datetime so far, I think that we should change that and so this
> would
>>>>>> be a good step in that direction as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The disadvantages are
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) Incompatible AQL change
>>>>>> 2) Incompatible ADM change
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> Till
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 26 Jan 2016, at 11:46, Eldon Carman wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I found that the lossless-JSON and clean-JSON printers were not being
>>>>>>> used.
>>>>>>> After connecting them to the respective JSON printer, I ran the query
>>>>>>> again.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> lossless-JSON result:
>>>>>>> { "orderedlist": [ { "date-interval": { "interval": { "start": {
> "date":
>>>>>>> "2012-01-01" }, "end": { "date": "2013-04-01" }}} }, {
> "time-interval": {
>>>>>>> "interval": { "start": { "time": "12:23:34.456Z" }, "end": { "time":
>>>>>>> "15:34:45.567Z" }}} }, { "datetime-interval": { "interval": {
> "start": {
>>>>>>> "datetime": "2012-01-01T04:23:34.456Z" }, "end": { "datetime":
>>>>>>> "2013-04-01T15:34:45.567Z" }}} } ] }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> clean-JSON result:
>>>>>>> [ { "date-interval": { "interval": { "start": "2012-01-01", "end":
>>>>>>> "2013-04-01"}} }, { "time-interval": { "interval": { "start":
>>>>>>> "12:23:34.456Z", "end": "15:34:45.567Z"}} }, { "datetime-interval": {
>>>>>>> "interval": { "start": "2012-01-01T04:23:34.456Z", "end":
>>>>>>> "2013-04-01T15:34:45.567Z"}} } ]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is this what you would have expected?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 7:07 PM, Eldon Carman <ec...@ucr.edu>
> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Thanks Chris for adding a fourth option. This option would focus our
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> updates to only the ADM output.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes, both lossless-JSON and clean-JSON outputs would need to be
> check
>>>>>>> also.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 5:58 PM, Chris Hillery
> <ch...@hillery.land>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I would vote for:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> d. Update the serialized format to output "interval-from-date" and
> put
>>>>>>>> both
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> dates in quotes.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I like the function name interval-from-date() better, and I don't
> think
>>>>>>>>> there's any need to maintain backwards compatibility with the old
> name
>>>>>>>>> which clearly never worked.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Couple thoughts, though: The serialized format really should be
> "ADM",
>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "AQL". As such I don't think it should reference functions at all.
> We
>>>>>>>>> already do this for many datatypes, such as uuid("...") and
>>>>>>>>> datetime("..."). Are those truly "Functions"? Are they
> "constructors",
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> is that different? In any case, the answer for interval types
> should be
>>>>>>>>> consistent with that.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Final note: quite possibly the lossless-JSON and clean-JSON
> outputs for
>>>>>>>>> intervals are broken as well, and should be fixed.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ceej
>>>>>>>>> aka Chris Hillery
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Till Westmann <ti...@apache.org>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Voting for a. Seems to be the least redundant option.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>> Till
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 25 Jan 2016, at 16:47, Eldon Carman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The interval field value printed in the ADM results can not be
> used to
>>>>>>>>>>> create an interval.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Intervals have several functions that are used to construct an
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> interval:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> interval-from-date/time/datetime
>>>>>>>>>>> and interval-start-from-date/time/datetime. It appears that this
> is
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> only way to create an interval. Thus, a user must use one of these
>>>>>>>>>>> function
>>>>>>>>>>> to create an interval.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The following query shows how to create three intervals.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Query:
>>>>>>>>>>> let $di := {"date-interval": interval-from-date("2012-01-01",
>>>>>>>>>>> "2013-04-01")}
>>>>>>>>>>> let $ti := {"time-interval": interval-from-time("12:23:34.456Z",
>>>>>>>>>>> "233445567+0800")}
>>>>>>>>>>> let $dti := {"datetime-interval":
>>>>>>>>>>> interval-from-datetime("2012-01-01T12:23:34.456+08:00",
>>>>>>>>>>> "20130401T153445567Z")}
>>>>>>>>>>> return [$di, $ti, $dti];
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Result:
>>>>>>>>>>> { "date-interval": interval-date("2012-01-01, 2013-04-01") }, {
>>>>>>>>>>> "time-interval": interval-time("12:23:34.456Z, 15:34:45.567Z")
> }, {
>>>>>>>>>>> "datetime-interval": interval-datetime("2012-01-01T04:23:34.456Z,
>>>>>>>>>>> 2013-04-01T15:34:45.567Z") } ]
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Notice the results show interval-date("date, date") which is
>>>>>>>>>>> different
>>>>>>>>>>> than
>>>>>>>>>>> the functions that are used to create a date interval. Notice
> that
>>>>>>>>>>> interval-date does not exists in AsterixDB and that the input is
> a
>>>>>>>>>> single
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> string of dates separated by a comma. Below are some ideas on how to
>>>>>>>>>>> create
>>>>>>>>>>> a round-trip for intervals.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Options for round tripping:
>>>>>>>>>>> a: Rename "interval-from-date" to "interval-date" and update the
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> output to
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> put both dates in quotes.
>>>>>>>>>>> b: Add alias for "interval-from-date" to "interval-date" and
> update
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> output to put both dates in quotes.
>>>>>>>>>>> c: Create an interval date constructor (called interval-date)
> that
>>>>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>>>> parse the string "date, date".
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The same process should be used for intervals with time and
> datetime.
>>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
Re: Round Tripping ADM Interval Data
Posted by Eldon Carman <ec...@ucr.edu>.
I submitted a code review for the external (phase 1) changes. The change
includes a interval constructor that takes two arguments of the same type.
For example:
let $v1 := interval(date("2013-01-01"), date("20130505"))
let $v2 := interval(time("00:01:01"), time("213901049+0800"))
let $v3 := interval(datetime("2013-01-01T00:01:01"),
datetime("20130505T213901049+0800"))
return { "v1": $v1, "v2": $v2, "v3": $v3 }
Do we want to keep the previous functions for declaring an interval? The
these functions are unique for each interval type and support string
arguments in addition to the specific type (date, time, datetime).
let $v1 := interval-from-date(date("2013-01-01"), date("20130505"))
let $v2 := interval-from-time(time("00:01:01"), time("213901049+0800"))
let $v3 := interval-from-datetime(datetime("2013-01-01T00:01:01"),
datetime("20130505T213901049+0800"))
return { "v1": $v1, "v2": $v2, "v3": $v3 }
They could be helpful, but I am don't think they are necessary. Removing
them would consolidate the code path for intervals. Thoughts?
On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 12:15 AM, Mike Carey <dt...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> +1 on all points below! :-)
>
>
> On 1/28/16 11:00 PM, Till Westmann wrote:
>>
>> Sounds good to me. It will change the binary representation of
intervals, so it’s not backwards compatible.
>> But it seems that the tag-first representation is the way it should have
been anyway and it’s a better way to go forward to support more generic
intervals. (And I prefer layout changes rather now than later ..)
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Till
>>
>> On 28 Jan 2016, at 21:46, Eldon Carman wrote:
>>
>>> Based on the discussion, I have suggestion for a two phase approach to
>>> support generic intervals.
>>>
>>>
>>> Phase 1: External
>>> The first phase will focus on areas seen by a user, either though ADM or
>>> AQL. The new format will also be open to supporting other interval
types,
>>> although currently will only support date, time and datetime. Here are a
>>> few of the action items:
>>>
>>> - ADM printer and parser changed to support the new generic style format
>>> - interval(date("2012-01-01”), date(”2013-04-01”))
>>> - Add an interval AQL constructor to support the above format
>>> - Alter interval byte structure to support any interval type
>>> - byte tag, T start, T end
>>> - where T is currently only date, time and datetime
>>>
>>> I created a ticket to track status for Phase 1:
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1281
>>>
>>>
>>> Phase 2: Internal
>>> Phase two will focus on items under the hood. These items are only seen
by
>>> a developer and need to be update to support new interval types. The
>>> complete task list will require some investigation. In addition to
picking
>>> what types of intervals should be supported.
>>>
>>> Phase 1 can start immediately while Phase 2 can wait until needed.
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Eldon Carman <ec...@ucr.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>>> While its a little more work to implement up front, the following
format
>>>> would be generic and support alternate interval types in the future. It
>>>> would be nice to have consistency between AQL and ADM, although not
>>>> required.
>>>>
>>>> interval(date("2012-01-01”), date(”2013-04-01”))
>>>>
>>>> As we move to supporting generic intervals, the byte storage format
will
>>>> need to be updated. Currently an interval is represented by: start
(long),
>>>> end (long), type tag (byte). To support other types, the type tag
should be
>>>> at the beginning of the byte sequence. This way the tag can be used to
>>>> determine the data length of each item in the interval.
>>>>
>>>> Should the changes to AQL and ADM include this interval storage change
>>>> (moving the type tag to the first byte of the interval storage format)?
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 12:42 PM, Till Westmann <ti...@apache.org>
wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> That’s actually a nice and generic serialization.
>>>>> I think that we should do this similarly in ADM and AQL.
>>>>> I.e. instead of using
>>>>>
>>>>> interval-from-date("2012-01-01”, ”2013-04-01”)
>>>>>
>>>>> (note the two parameters) in AQL and
>>>>>
>>>>> interval-date("2012-01-01, 2013-04-01")
>>>>>
>>>>> (not the single parameter) in ADM we should use
>>>>>
>>>>> interval(date("2012-01-01”), date(”2013-04-01”))
>>>>>
>>>>> for both. That would have a number of advantages:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) It is consistent between AQL and ADM.
>>>>> 2) It is consistent with the JSON serialization.
>>>>> 3) It reduces the number of magic parsers.
>>>>> 4) It keeps the interval orthogonal to the type used in the interval.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 4): While we don’t support intervals of other types than date,
time,
>>>>> and datetime so far, I think that we should change that and so this
would
>>>>> be a good step in that direction as well.
>>>>>
>>>>> The disadvantages are
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) Incompatible AQL change
>>>>> 2) Incompatible ADM change
>>>>>
>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Till
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 26 Jan 2016, at 11:46, Eldon Carman wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I found that the lossless-JSON and clean-JSON printers were not being
>>>>>>
>>>>>> used.
>>>>>> After connecting them to the respective JSON printer, I ran the query
>>>>>> again.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> lossless-JSON result:
>>>>>> { "orderedlist": [ { "date-interval": { "interval": { "start": {
"date":
>>>>>> "2012-01-01" }, "end": { "date": "2013-04-01" }}} }, {
"time-interval": {
>>>>>> "interval": { "start": { "time": "12:23:34.456Z" }, "end": { "time":
>>>>>> "15:34:45.567Z" }}} }, { "datetime-interval": { "interval": {
"start": {
>>>>>> "datetime": "2012-01-01T04:23:34.456Z" }, "end": { "datetime":
>>>>>> "2013-04-01T15:34:45.567Z" }}} } ] }
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> clean-JSON result:
>>>>>> [ { "date-interval": { "interval": { "start": "2012-01-01", "end":
>>>>>> "2013-04-01"}} }, { "time-interval": { "interval": { "start":
>>>>>> "12:23:34.456Z", "end": "15:34:45.567Z"}} }, { "datetime-interval": {
>>>>>> "interval": { "start": "2012-01-01T04:23:34.456Z", "end":
>>>>>> "2013-04-01T15:34:45.567Z"}} } ]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is this what you would have expected?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 7:07 PM, Eldon Carman <ec...@ucr.edu>
wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks Chris for adding a fourth option. This option would focus our
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> updates to only the ADM output.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, both lossless-JSON and clean-JSON outputs would need to be
check
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> also.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 5:58 PM, Chris Hillery
<ch...@hillery.land>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I would vote for:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> d. Update the serialized format to output "interval-from-date" and
put
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> both
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> dates in quotes.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I like the function name interval-from-date() better, and I don't
think
>>>>>>>> there's any need to maintain backwards compatibility with the old
name
>>>>>>>> which clearly never worked.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Couple thoughts, though: The serialized format really should be
"ADM",
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "AQL". As such I don't think it should reference functions at all.
We
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> already do this for many datatypes, such as uuid("...") and
>>>>>>>> datetime("..."). Are those truly "Functions"? Are they
"constructors",
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> is that different? In any case, the answer for interval types
should be
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> consistent with that.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Final note: quite possibly the lossless-JSON and clean-JSON
outputs for
>>>>>>>> intervals are broken as well, and should be fixed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ceej
>>>>>>>> aka Chris Hillery
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Till Westmann <ti...@apache.org>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Voting for a. Seems to be the least redundant option.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>> Till
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 25 Jan 2016, at 16:47, Eldon Carman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The interval field value printed in the ADM results can not be
used to
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> create an interval.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Intervals have several functions that are used to construct an
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> interval:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> interval-from-date/time/datetime
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> and interval-start-from-date/time/datetime. It appears that this
is
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> only way to create an interval. Thus, a user must use one of these
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> function
>>>>>>>>>> to create an interval.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The following query shows how to create three intervals.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Query:
>>>>>>>>>> let $di := {"date-interval": interval-from-date("2012-01-01",
>>>>>>>>>> "2013-04-01")}
>>>>>>>>>> let $ti := {"time-interval": interval-from-time("12:23:34.456Z",
>>>>>>>>>> "233445567+0800")}
>>>>>>>>>> let $dti := {"datetime-interval":
>>>>>>>>>> interval-from-datetime("2012-01-01T12:23:34.456+08:00",
>>>>>>>>>> "20130401T153445567Z")}
>>>>>>>>>> return [$di, $ti, $dti];
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Result:
>>>>>>>>>> { "date-interval": interval-date("2012-01-01, 2013-04-01") }, {
>>>>>>>>>> "time-interval": interval-time("12:23:34.456Z, 15:34:45.567Z")
}, {
>>>>>>>>>> "datetime-interval": interval-datetime("2012-01-01T04:23:34.456Z,
>>>>>>>>>> 2013-04-01T15:34:45.567Z") } ]
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Notice the results show interval-date("date, date") which is
>>>>>>>>>> different
>>>>>>>>>> than
>>>>>>>>>> the functions that are used to create a date interval. Notice
that
>>>>>>>>>> interval-date does not exists in AsterixDB and that the input is
a
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> single
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> string of dates separated by a comma. Below are some ideas on how to
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> create
>>>>>>>>>> a round-trip for intervals.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Options for round tripping:
>>>>>>>>>> a: Rename "interval-from-date" to "interval-date" and update the
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> output to
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> put both dates in quotes.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> b: Add alias for "interval-from-date" to "interval-date" and
update
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> output to put both dates in quotes.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> c: Create an interval date constructor (called interval-date)
that
>>>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>>> parse the string "date, date".
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The same process should be used for intervals with time and
datetime.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>
Re: Round Tripping ADM Interval Data
Posted by Mike Carey <dt...@gmail.com>.
+1 on all points below! :-)
On 1/28/16 11:00 PM, Till Westmann wrote:
> Sounds good to me. It will change the binary representation of
> intervals, so it’s not backwards compatible.
> But it seems that the tag-first representation is the way it should
> have been anyway and it’s a better way to go forward to support more
> generic intervals. (And I prefer layout changes rather now than later ..)
>
> Cheers,
> Till
>
> On 28 Jan 2016, at 21:46, Eldon Carman wrote:
>
>> Based on the discussion, I have suggestion for a two phase approach to
>> support generic intervals.
>>
>>
>> Phase 1: External
>> The first phase will focus on areas seen by a user, either though ADM or
>> AQL. The new format will also be open to supporting other interval
>> types,
>> although currently will only support date, time and datetime. Here are a
>> few of the action items:
>>
>> - ADM printer and parser changed to support the new generic style format
>> - interval(date("2012-01-01”), date(”2013-04-01”))
>> - Add an interval AQL constructor to support the above format
>> - Alter interval byte structure to support any interval type
>> - byte tag, T start, T end
>> - where T is currently only date, time and datetime
>>
>> I created a ticket to track status for Phase 1:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1281
>>
>>
>> Phase 2: Internal
>> Phase two will focus on items under the hood. These items are only
>> seen by
>> a developer and need to be update to support new interval types. The
>> complete task list will require some investigation. In addition to
>> picking
>> what types of intervals should be supported.
>>
>> Phase 1 can start immediately while Phase 2 can wait until needed.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Eldon Carman <ec...@ucr.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> While its a little more work to implement up front, the following
>>> format
>>> would be generic and support alternate interval types in the future. It
>>> would be nice to have consistency between AQL and ADM, although not
>>> required.
>>>
>>> interval(date("2012-01-01”), date(”2013-04-01”))
>>>
>>> As we move to supporting generic intervals, the byte storage format
>>> will
>>> need to be updated. Currently an interval is represented by: start
>>> (long),
>>> end (long), type tag (byte). To support other types, the type tag
>>> should be
>>> at the beginning of the byte sequence. This way the tag can be used to
>>> determine the data length of each item in the interval.
>>>
>>> Should the changes to AQL and ADM include this interval storage change
>>> (moving the type tag to the first byte of the interval storage format)?
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 12:42 PM, Till Westmann <ti...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> That’s actually a nice and generic serialization.
>>>> I think that we should do this similarly in ADM and AQL.
>>>> I.e. instead of using
>>>>
>>>> interval-from-date("2012-01-01”, ”2013-04-01”)
>>>>
>>>> (note the two parameters) in AQL and
>>>>
>>>> interval-date("2012-01-01, 2013-04-01")
>>>>
>>>> (not the single parameter) in ADM we should use
>>>>
>>>> interval(date("2012-01-01”), date(”2013-04-01”))
>>>>
>>>> for both. That would have a number of advantages:
>>>>
>>>> 1) It is consistent between AQL and ADM.
>>>> 2) It is consistent with the JSON serialization.
>>>> 3) It reduces the number of magic parsers.
>>>> 4) It keeps the interval orthogonal to the type used in the interval.
>>>>
>>>> On 4): While we don’t support intervals of other types than date,
>>>> time,
>>>> and datetime so far, I think that we should change that and so this
>>>> would
>>>> be a good step in that direction as well.
>>>>
>>>> The disadvantages are
>>>>
>>>> 1) Incompatible AQL change
>>>> 2) Incompatible ADM change
>>>>
>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Till
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 26 Jan 2016, at 11:46, Eldon Carman wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I found that the lossless-JSON and clean-JSON printers were not being
>>>>> used.
>>>>> After connecting them to the respective JSON printer, I ran the query
>>>>> again.
>>>>>
>>>>> lossless-JSON result:
>>>>> { "orderedlist": [ { "date-interval": { "interval": { "start": {
>>>>> "date":
>>>>> "2012-01-01" }, "end": { "date": "2013-04-01" }}} }, {
>>>>> "time-interval": {
>>>>> "interval": { "start": { "time": "12:23:34.456Z" }, "end": { "time":
>>>>> "15:34:45.567Z" }}} }, { "datetime-interval": { "interval": {
>>>>> "start": {
>>>>> "datetime": "2012-01-01T04:23:34.456Z" }, "end": { "datetime":
>>>>> "2013-04-01T15:34:45.567Z" }}} } ] }
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> clean-JSON result:
>>>>> [ { "date-interval": { "interval": { "start": "2012-01-01", "end":
>>>>> "2013-04-01"}} }, { "time-interval": { "interval": { "start":
>>>>> "12:23:34.456Z", "end": "15:34:45.567Z"}} }, { "datetime-interval": {
>>>>> "interval": { "start": "2012-01-01T04:23:34.456Z", "end":
>>>>> "2013-04-01T15:34:45.567Z"}} } ]
>>>>>
>>>>> Is this what you would have expected?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 7:07 PM, Eldon Carman <ec...@ucr.edu>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks Chris for adding a fourth option. This option would focus our
>>>>>>
>>>>> updates to only the ADM output.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, both lossless-JSON and clean-JSON outputs would need to be
>>>>>> check
>>>>>>
>>>>> also.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 5:58 PM, Chris Hillery
>>>>>> <ch...@hillery.land>
>>>>>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would vote for:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> d. Update the serialized format to output "interval-from-date"
>>>>>>> and put
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> both
>>>>>
>>>>>> dates in quotes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I like the function name interval-from-date() better, and I
>>>>>>> don't think
>>>>>>> there's any need to maintain backwards compatibility with the
>>>>>>> old name
>>>>>>> which clearly never worked.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Couple thoughts, though: The serialized format really should be
>>>>>>> "ADM",
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> not
>>>>>
>>>>>> "AQL". As such I don't think it should reference functions at
>>>>>> all. We
>>>>>>> already do this for many datatypes, such as uuid("...") and
>>>>>>> datetime("..."). Are those truly "Functions"? Are they
>>>>>>> "constructors",
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> and
>>>>>
>>>>>> is that different? In any case, the answer for interval types
>>>>>> should be
>>>>>>> consistent with that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Final note: quite possibly the lossless-JSON and clean-JSON
>>>>>>> outputs for
>>>>>>> intervals are broken as well, and should be fixed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ceej
>>>>>>> aka Chris Hillery
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Till Westmann <ti...@apache.org>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Voting for a. Seems to be the least redundant option.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>> Till
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 25 Jan 2016, at 16:47, Eldon Carman wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The interval field value printed in the ADM results can not be
>>>>>>>> used to
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> create an interval.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Intervals have several functions that are used to construct an
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> interval:
>>>>>
>>>>>> interval-from-date/time/datetime
>>>>>>>>> and interval-start-from-date/time/datetime. It appears that
>>>>>>>>> this is
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>
>>>>>> only way to create an interval. Thus, a user must use one of these
>>>>>>>>> function
>>>>>>>>> to create an interval.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The following query shows how to create three intervals.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Query:
>>>>>>>>> let $di := {"date-interval": interval-from-date("2012-01-01",
>>>>>>>>> "2013-04-01")}
>>>>>>>>> let $ti := {"time-interval": interval-from-time("12:23:34.456Z",
>>>>>>>>> "233445567+0800")}
>>>>>>>>> let $dti := {"datetime-interval":
>>>>>>>>> interval-from-datetime("2012-01-01T12:23:34.456+08:00",
>>>>>>>>> "20130401T153445567Z")}
>>>>>>>>> return [$di, $ti, $dti];
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Result:
>>>>>>>>> { "date-interval": interval-date("2012-01-01, 2013-04-01") }, {
>>>>>>>>> "time-interval": interval-time("12:23:34.456Z, 15:34:45.567Z")
>>>>>>>>> }, {
>>>>>>>>> "datetime-interval": interval-datetime("2012-01-01T04:23:34.456Z,
>>>>>>>>> 2013-04-01T15:34:45.567Z") } ]
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Notice the results show interval-date("date, date") which is
>>>>>>>>> different
>>>>>>>>> than
>>>>>>>>> the functions that are used to create a date interval. Notice
>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>> interval-date does not exists in AsterixDB and that the input
>>>>>>>>> is a
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> single
>>>>>
>>>>>> string of dates separated by a comma. Below are some ideas on how to
>>>>>>>>> create
>>>>>>>>> a round-trip for intervals.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Options for round tripping:
>>>>>>>>> a: Rename "interval-from-date" to "interval-date" and update the
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> output to
>>>>>
>>>>>> put both dates in quotes.
>>>>>>>>> b: Add alias for "interval-from-date" to "interval-date" and
>>>>>>>>> update
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>
>>>>>> output to put both dates in quotes.
>>>>>>>>> c: Create an interval date constructor (called interval-date)
>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>> parse the string "date, date".
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The same process should be used for intervals with time and
>>>>>>>>> datetime.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>
Re: Round Tripping ADM Interval Data
Posted by Till Westmann <ti...@apache.org>.
Sounds good to me. It will change the binary representation of
intervals, so it’s not backwards compatible.
But it seems that the tag-first representation is the way it should have
been anyway and it’s a better way to go forward to support more
generic intervals. (And I prefer layout changes rather now than later
..)
Cheers,
Till
On 28 Jan 2016, at 21:46, Eldon Carman wrote:
> Based on the discussion, I have suggestion for a two phase approach to
> support generic intervals.
>
>
> Phase 1: External
> The first phase will focus on areas seen by a user, either though ADM
> or
> AQL. The new format will also be open to supporting other interval
> types,
> although currently will only support date, time and datetime. Here are
> a
> few of the action items:
>
> - ADM printer and parser changed to support the new generic style
> format
> - interval(date("2012-01-01”), date(”2013-04-01”))
> - Add an interval AQL constructor to support the above format
> - Alter interval byte structure to support any interval type
> - byte tag, T start, T end
> - where T is currently only date, time and datetime
>
> I created a ticket to track status for Phase 1:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1281
>
>
> Phase 2: Internal
> Phase two will focus on items under the hood. These items are only
> seen by
> a developer and need to be update to support new interval types. The
> complete task list will require some investigation. In addition to
> picking
> what types of intervals should be supported.
>
> Phase 1 can start immediately while Phase 2 can wait until needed.
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Eldon Carman <ec...@ucr.edu>
> wrote:
>
>> While its a little more work to implement up front, the following
>> format
>> would be generic and support alternate interval types in the future.
>> It
>> would be nice to have consistency between AQL and ADM, although not
>> required.
>>
>> interval(date("2012-01-01”), date(”2013-04-01”))
>>
>> As we move to supporting generic intervals, the byte storage format
>> will
>> need to be updated. Currently an interval is represented by: start
>> (long),
>> end (long), type tag (byte). To support other types, the type tag
>> should be
>> at the beginning of the byte sequence. This way the tag can be used
>> to
>> determine the data length of each item in the interval.
>>
>> Should the changes to AQL and ADM include this interval storage
>> change
>> (moving the type tag to the first byte of the interval storage
>> format)?
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 12:42 PM, Till Westmann <ti...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> That’s actually a nice and generic serialization.
>>> I think that we should do this similarly in ADM and AQL.
>>> I.e. instead of using
>>>
>>> interval-from-date("2012-01-01”, ”2013-04-01”)
>>>
>>> (note the two parameters) in AQL and
>>>
>>> interval-date("2012-01-01, 2013-04-01")
>>>
>>> (not the single parameter) in ADM we should use
>>>
>>> interval(date("2012-01-01”), date(”2013-04-01”))
>>>
>>> for both. That would have a number of advantages:
>>>
>>> 1) It is consistent between AQL and ADM.
>>> 2) It is consistent with the JSON serialization.
>>> 3) It reduces the number of magic parsers.
>>> 4) It keeps the interval orthogonal to the type used in the
>>> interval.
>>>
>>> On 4): While we don’t support intervals of other types than date,
>>> time,
>>> and datetime so far, I think that we should change that and so this
>>> would
>>> be a good step in that direction as well.
>>>
>>> The disadvantages are
>>>
>>> 1) Incompatible AQL change
>>> 2) Incompatible ADM change
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Till
>>>
>>>
>>> On 26 Jan 2016, at 11:46, Eldon Carman wrote:
>>>
>>> I found that the lossless-JSON and clean-JSON printers were not
>>> being
>>>> used.
>>>> After connecting them to the respective JSON printer, I ran the
>>>> query
>>>> again.
>>>>
>>>> lossless-JSON result:
>>>> { "orderedlist": [ { "date-interval": { "interval": { "start": {
>>>> "date":
>>>> "2012-01-01" }, "end": { "date": "2013-04-01" }}} }, {
>>>> "time-interval": {
>>>> "interval": { "start": { "time": "12:23:34.456Z" }, "end": {
>>>> "time":
>>>> "15:34:45.567Z" }}} }, { "datetime-interval": { "interval": {
>>>> "start": {
>>>> "datetime": "2012-01-01T04:23:34.456Z" }, "end": { "datetime":
>>>> "2013-04-01T15:34:45.567Z" }}} } ] }
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> clean-JSON result:
>>>> [ { "date-interval": { "interval": { "start": "2012-01-01", "end":
>>>> "2013-04-01"}} }, { "time-interval": { "interval": { "start":
>>>> "12:23:34.456Z", "end": "15:34:45.567Z"}} }, { "datetime-interval":
>>>> {
>>>> "interval": { "start": "2012-01-01T04:23:34.456Z", "end":
>>>> "2013-04-01T15:34:45.567Z"}} } ]
>>>>
>>>> Is this what you would have expected?
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 7:07 PM, Eldon Carman <ec...@ucr.edu>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks Chris for adding a fourth option. This option would focus
>>>>> our
>>>>>
>>>> updates to only the ADM output.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, both lossless-JSON and clean-JSON outputs would need to be
>>>>> check
>>>>>
>>>> also.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 5:58 PM, Chris Hillery
>>>>> <ch...@hillery.land>
>>>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> I would vote for:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> d. Update the serialized format to output "interval-from-date"
>>>>>> and put
>>>>>>
>>>>> both
>>>>
>>>>> dates in quotes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I like the function name interval-from-date() better, and I don't
>>>>>> think
>>>>>> there's any need to maintain backwards compatibility with the old
>>>>>> name
>>>>>> which clearly never worked.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Couple thoughts, though: The serialized format really should be
>>>>>> "ADM",
>>>>>>
>>>>> not
>>>>
>>>>> "AQL". As such I don't think it should reference functions at all.
>>>>> We
>>>>>> already do this for many datatypes, such as uuid("...") and
>>>>>> datetime("..."). Are those truly "Functions"? Are they
>>>>>> "constructors",
>>>>>>
>>>>> and
>>>>
>>>>> is that different? In any case, the answer for interval types
>>>>> should be
>>>>>> consistent with that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Final note: quite possibly the lossless-JSON and clean-JSON
>>>>>> outputs for
>>>>>> intervals are broken as well, and should be fixed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ceej
>>>>>> aka Chris Hillery
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Till Westmann <ti...@apache.org>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Voting for a. Seems to be the least redundant option.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> Till
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 25 Jan 2016, at 16:47, Eldon Carman wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The interval field value printed in the ADM results can not be
>>>>>>> used to
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> create an interval.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Intervals have several functions that are used to construct an
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> interval:
>>>>
>>>>> interval-from-date/time/datetime
>>>>>>>> and interval-start-from-date/time/datetime. It appears that
>>>>>>>> this is
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the
>>>>
>>>>> only way to create an interval. Thus, a user must use one of these
>>>>>>>> function
>>>>>>>> to create an interval.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The following query shows how to create three intervals.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Query:
>>>>>>>> let $di := {"date-interval": interval-from-date("2012-01-01",
>>>>>>>> "2013-04-01")}
>>>>>>>> let $ti := {"time-interval":
>>>>>>>> interval-from-time("12:23:34.456Z",
>>>>>>>> "233445567+0800")}
>>>>>>>> let $dti := {"datetime-interval":
>>>>>>>> interval-from-datetime("2012-01-01T12:23:34.456+08:00",
>>>>>>>> "20130401T153445567Z")}
>>>>>>>> return [$di, $ti, $dti];
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Result:
>>>>>>>> { "date-interval": interval-date("2012-01-01, 2013-04-01") }, {
>>>>>>>> "time-interval": interval-time("12:23:34.456Z, 15:34:45.567Z")
>>>>>>>> }, {
>>>>>>>> "datetime-interval":
>>>>>>>> interval-datetime("2012-01-01T04:23:34.456Z,
>>>>>>>> 2013-04-01T15:34:45.567Z") } ]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Notice the results show interval-date("date, date") which is
>>>>>>>> different
>>>>>>>> than
>>>>>>>> the functions that are used to create a date interval. Notice
>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>> interval-date does not exists in AsterixDB and that the input
>>>>>>>> is a
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> single
>>>>
>>>>> string of dates separated by a comma. Below are some ideas on how
>>>>> to
>>>>>>>> create
>>>>>>>> a round-trip for intervals.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Options for round tripping:
>>>>>>>> a: Rename "interval-from-date" to "interval-date" and update
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> output to
>>>>
>>>>> put both dates in quotes.
>>>>>>>> b: Add alias for "interval-from-date" to "interval-date" and
>>>>>>>> update
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the
>>>>
>>>>> output to put both dates in quotes.
>>>>>>>> c: Create an interval date constructor (called interval-date)
>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>> parse the string "date, date".
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The same process should be used for intervals with time and
>>>>>>>> datetime.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
Re: Round Tripping ADM Interval Data
Posted by Eldon Carman <ec...@ucr.edu>.
Based on the discussion, I have suggestion for a two phase approach to
support generic intervals.
Phase 1: External
The first phase will focus on areas seen by a user, either though ADM or
AQL. The new format will also be open to supporting other interval types,
although currently will only support date, time and datetime. Here are a
few of the action items:
- ADM printer and parser changed to support the new generic style format
- interval(date("2012-01-01”), date(”2013-04-01”))
- Add an interval AQL constructor to support the above format
- Alter interval byte structure to support any interval type
- byte tag, T start, T end
- where T is currently only date, time and datetime
I created a ticket to track status for Phase 1:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1281
Phase 2: Internal
Phase two will focus on items under the hood. These items are only seen by
a developer and need to be update to support new interval types. The
complete task list will require some investigation. In addition to picking
what types of intervals should be supported.
Phase 1 can start immediately while Phase 2 can wait until needed.
Thoughts?
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Eldon Carman <ec...@ucr.edu> wrote:
> While its a little more work to implement up front, the following format
> would be generic and support alternate interval types in the future. It
> would be nice to have consistency between AQL and ADM, although not
> required.
>
> interval(date("2012-01-01”), date(”2013-04-01”))
>
> As we move to supporting generic intervals, the byte storage format will
> need to be updated. Currently an interval is represented by: start (long),
> end (long), type tag (byte). To support other types, the type tag should be
> at the beginning of the byte sequence. This way the tag can be used to
> determine the data length of each item in the interval.
>
> Should the changes to AQL and ADM include this interval storage change
> (moving the type tag to the first byte of the interval storage format)?
>
> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 12:42 PM, Till Westmann <ti...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> That’s actually a nice and generic serialization.
>> I think that we should do this similarly in ADM and AQL.
>> I.e. instead of using
>>
>> interval-from-date("2012-01-01”, ”2013-04-01”)
>>
>> (note the two parameters) in AQL and
>>
>> interval-date("2012-01-01, 2013-04-01")
>>
>> (not the single parameter) in ADM we should use
>>
>> interval(date("2012-01-01”), date(”2013-04-01”))
>>
>> for both. That would have a number of advantages:
>>
>> 1) It is consistent between AQL and ADM.
>> 2) It is consistent with the JSON serialization.
>> 3) It reduces the number of magic parsers.
>> 4) It keeps the interval orthogonal to the type used in the interval.
>>
>> On 4): While we don’t support intervals of other types than date, time,
>> and datetime so far, I think that we should change that and so this would
>> be a good step in that direction as well.
>>
>> The disadvantages are
>>
>> 1) Incompatible AQL change
>> 2) Incompatible ADM change
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Till
>>
>>
>> On 26 Jan 2016, at 11:46, Eldon Carman wrote:
>>
>> I found that the lossless-JSON and clean-JSON printers were not being
>>> used.
>>> After connecting them to the respective JSON printer, I ran the query
>>> again.
>>>
>>> lossless-JSON result:
>>> { "orderedlist": [ { "date-interval": { "interval": { "start": { "date":
>>> "2012-01-01" }, "end": { "date": "2013-04-01" }}} }, { "time-interval": {
>>> "interval": { "start": { "time": "12:23:34.456Z" }, "end": { "time":
>>> "15:34:45.567Z" }}} }, { "datetime-interval": { "interval": { "start": {
>>> "datetime": "2012-01-01T04:23:34.456Z" }, "end": { "datetime":
>>> "2013-04-01T15:34:45.567Z" }}} } ] }
>>>
>>>
>>> clean-JSON result:
>>> [ { "date-interval": { "interval": { "start": "2012-01-01", "end":
>>> "2013-04-01"}} }, { "time-interval": { "interval": { "start":
>>> "12:23:34.456Z", "end": "15:34:45.567Z"}} }, { "datetime-interval": {
>>> "interval": { "start": "2012-01-01T04:23:34.456Z", "end":
>>> "2013-04-01T15:34:45.567Z"}} } ]
>>>
>>> Is this what you would have expected?
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 7:07 PM, Eldon Carman <ec...@ucr.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks Chris for adding a fourth option. This option would focus our
>>>>
>>> updates to only the ADM output.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes, both lossless-JSON and clean-JSON outputs would need to be check
>>>>
>>> also.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 5:58 PM, Chris Hillery <ch...@hillery.land>
>>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I would vote for:
>>>>>
>>>>> d. Update the serialized format to output "interval-from-date" and put
>>>>>
>>>> both
>>>
>>>> dates in quotes.
>>>>>
>>>>> I like the function name interval-from-date() better, and I don't think
>>>>> there's any need to maintain backwards compatibility with the old name
>>>>> which clearly never worked.
>>>>>
>>>>> Couple thoughts, though: The serialized format really should be "ADM",
>>>>>
>>>> not
>>>
>>>> "AQL". As such I don't think it should reference functions at all. We
>>>>> already do this for many datatypes, such as uuid("...") and
>>>>> datetime("..."). Are those truly "Functions"? Are they "constructors",
>>>>>
>>>> and
>>>
>>>> is that different? In any case, the answer for interval types should be
>>>>> consistent with that.
>>>>>
>>>>> Final note: quite possibly the lossless-JSON and clean-JSON outputs for
>>>>> intervals are broken as well, and should be fixed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ceej
>>>>> aka Chris Hillery
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Till Westmann <ti...@apache.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Voting for a. Seems to be the least redundant option.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> Till
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 25 Jan 2016, at 16:47, Eldon Carman wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The interval field value printed in the ADM results can not be used to
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> create an interval.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Intervals have several functions that are used to construct an
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> interval:
>>>
>>>> interval-from-date/time/datetime
>>>>>>> and interval-start-from-date/time/datetime. It appears that this is
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> the
>>>
>>>> only way to create an interval. Thus, a user must use one of these
>>>>>>> function
>>>>>>> to create an interval.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The following query shows how to create three intervals.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Query:
>>>>>>> let $di := {"date-interval": interval-from-date("2012-01-01",
>>>>>>> "2013-04-01")}
>>>>>>> let $ti := {"time-interval": interval-from-time("12:23:34.456Z",
>>>>>>> "233445567+0800")}
>>>>>>> let $dti := {"datetime-interval":
>>>>>>> interval-from-datetime("2012-01-01T12:23:34.456+08:00",
>>>>>>> "20130401T153445567Z")}
>>>>>>> return [$di, $ti, $dti];
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Result:
>>>>>>> { "date-interval": interval-date("2012-01-01, 2013-04-01") }, {
>>>>>>> "time-interval": interval-time("12:23:34.456Z, 15:34:45.567Z") }, {
>>>>>>> "datetime-interval": interval-datetime("2012-01-01T04:23:34.456Z,
>>>>>>> 2013-04-01T15:34:45.567Z") } ]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Notice the results show interval-date("date, date") which is
>>>>>>> different
>>>>>>> than
>>>>>>> the functions that are used to create a date interval. Notice that
>>>>>>> interval-date does not exists in AsterixDB and that the input is a
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> single
>>>
>>>> string of dates separated by a comma. Below are some ideas on how to
>>>>>>> create
>>>>>>> a round-trip for intervals.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Options for round tripping:
>>>>>>> a: Rename "interval-from-date" to "interval-date" and update the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> output to
>>>
>>>> put both dates in quotes.
>>>>>>> b: Add alias for "interval-from-date" to "interval-date" and update
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> the
>>>
>>>> output to put both dates in quotes.
>>>>>>> c: Create an interval date constructor (called interval-date) that
>>>>>>> can
>>>>>>> parse the string "date, date".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The same process should be used for intervals with time and datetime.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>
Re: Round Tripping ADM Interval Data
Posted by Eldon Carman <ec...@ucr.edu>.
While its a little more work to implement up front, the following format
would be generic and support alternate interval types in the future. It
would be nice to have consistency between AQL and ADM, although not
required.
interval(date("2012-01-01”), date(”2013-04-01”))
As we move to supporting generic intervals, the byte storage format will
need to be updated. Currently an interval is represented by: start (long),
end (long), type tag (byte). To support other types, the type tag should be
at the beginning of the byte sequence. This way the tag can be used to
determine the data length of each item in the interval.
Should the changes to AQL and ADM include this interval storage change
(moving the type tag to the first byte of the interval storage format)?
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 12:42 PM, Till Westmann <ti...@apache.org> wrote:
> That’s actually a nice and generic serialization.
> I think that we should do this similarly in ADM and AQL.
> I.e. instead of using
>
> interval-from-date("2012-01-01”, ”2013-04-01”)
>
> (note the two parameters) in AQL and
>
> interval-date("2012-01-01, 2013-04-01")
>
> (not the single parameter) in ADM we should use
>
> interval(date("2012-01-01”), date(”2013-04-01”))
>
> for both. That would have a number of advantages:
>
> 1) It is consistent between AQL and ADM.
> 2) It is consistent with the JSON serialization.
> 3) It reduces the number of magic parsers.
> 4) It keeps the interval orthogonal to the type used in the interval.
>
> On 4): While we don’t support intervals of other types than date, time,
> and datetime so far, I think that we should change that and so this would
> be a good step in that direction as well.
>
> The disadvantages are
>
> 1) Incompatible AQL change
> 2) Incompatible ADM change
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Cheers,
> Till
>
>
> On 26 Jan 2016, at 11:46, Eldon Carman wrote:
>
> I found that the lossless-JSON and clean-JSON printers were not being used.
>> After connecting them to the respective JSON printer, I ran the query
>> again.
>>
>> lossless-JSON result:
>> { "orderedlist": [ { "date-interval": { "interval": { "start": { "date":
>> "2012-01-01" }, "end": { "date": "2013-04-01" }}} }, { "time-interval": {
>> "interval": { "start": { "time": "12:23:34.456Z" }, "end": { "time":
>> "15:34:45.567Z" }}} }, { "datetime-interval": { "interval": { "start": {
>> "datetime": "2012-01-01T04:23:34.456Z" }, "end": { "datetime":
>> "2013-04-01T15:34:45.567Z" }}} } ] }
>>
>>
>> clean-JSON result:
>> [ { "date-interval": { "interval": { "start": "2012-01-01", "end":
>> "2013-04-01"}} }, { "time-interval": { "interval": { "start":
>> "12:23:34.456Z", "end": "15:34:45.567Z"}} }, { "datetime-interval": {
>> "interval": { "start": "2012-01-01T04:23:34.456Z", "end":
>> "2013-04-01T15:34:45.567Z"}} } ]
>>
>> Is this what you would have expected?
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 7:07 PM, Eldon Carman <ec...@ucr.edu> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks Chris for adding a fourth option. This option would focus our
>>>
>> updates to only the ADM output.
>>
>>>
>>> Yes, both lossless-JSON and clean-JSON outputs would need to be check
>>>
>> also.
>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 5:58 PM, Chris Hillery <ch...@hillery.land>
>>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>> I would vote for:
>>>>
>>>> d. Update the serialized format to output "interval-from-date" and put
>>>>
>>> both
>>
>>> dates in quotes.
>>>>
>>>> I like the function name interval-from-date() better, and I don't think
>>>> there's any need to maintain backwards compatibility with the old name
>>>> which clearly never worked.
>>>>
>>>> Couple thoughts, though: The serialized format really should be "ADM",
>>>>
>>> not
>>
>>> "AQL". As such I don't think it should reference functions at all. We
>>>> already do this for many datatypes, such as uuid("...") and
>>>> datetime("..."). Are those truly "Functions"? Are they "constructors",
>>>>
>>> and
>>
>>> is that different? In any case, the answer for interval types should be
>>>> consistent with that.
>>>>
>>>> Final note: quite possibly the lossless-JSON and clean-JSON outputs for
>>>> intervals are broken as well, and should be fixed.
>>>>
>>>> Ceej
>>>> aka Chris Hillery
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Till Westmann <ti...@apache.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Voting for a. Seems to be the least redundant option.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Till
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 25 Jan 2016, at 16:47, Eldon Carman wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> The interval field value printed in the ADM results can not be used to
>>>>>
>>>>>> create an interval.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Intervals have several functions that are used to construct an
>>>>>>
>>>>> interval:
>>
>>> interval-from-date/time/datetime
>>>>>> and interval-start-from-date/time/datetime. It appears that this is
>>>>>>
>>>>> the
>>
>>> only way to create an interval. Thus, a user must use one of these
>>>>>> function
>>>>>> to create an interval.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The following query shows how to create three intervals.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Query:
>>>>>> let $di := {"date-interval": interval-from-date("2012-01-01",
>>>>>> "2013-04-01")}
>>>>>> let $ti := {"time-interval": interval-from-time("12:23:34.456Z",
>>>>>> "233445567+0800")}
>>>>>> let $dti := {"datetime-interval":
>>>>>> interval-from-datetime("2012-01-01T12:23:34.456+08:00",
>>>>>> "20130401T153445567Z")}
>>>>>> return [$di, $ti, $dti];
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Result:
>>>>>> { "date-interval": interval-date("2012-01-01, 2013-04-01") }, {
>>>>>> "time-interval": interval-time("12:23:34.456Z, 15:34:45.567Z") }, {
>>>>>> "datetime-interval": interval-datetime("2012-01-01T04:23:34.456Z,
>>>>>> 2013-04-01T15:34:45.567Z") } ]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Notice the results show interval-date("date, date") which is different
>>>>>> than
>>>>>> the functions that are used to create a date interval. Notice that
>>>>>> interval-date does not exists in AsterixDB and that the input is a
>>>>>>
>>>>> single
>>
>>> string of dates separated by a comma. Below are some ideas on how to
>>>>>> create
>>>>>> a round-trip for intervals.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Options for round tripping:
>>>>>> a: Rename "interval-from-date" to "interval-date" and update the
>>>>>>
>>>>> output to
>>
>>> put both dates in quotes.
>>>>>> b: Add alias for "interval-from-date" to "interval-date" and update
>>>>>>
>>>>> the
>>
>>> output to put both dates in quotes.
>>>>>> c: Create an interval date constructor (called interval-date) that can
>>>>>> parse the string "date, date".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The same process should be used for intervals with time and datetime.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
Re: Round Tripping ADM Interval Data
Posted by Till Westmann <ti...@apache.org>.
That’s actually a nice and generic serialization.
I think that we should do this similarly in ADM and AQL.
I.e. instead of using
interval-from-date("2012-01-01”, ”2013-04-01”)
(note the two parameters) in AQL and
interval-date("2012-01-01, 2013-04-01")
(not the single parameter) in ADM we should use
interval(date("2012-01-01”), date(”2013-04-01”))
for both. That would have a number of advantages:
1) It is consistent between AQL and ADM.
2) It is consistent with the JSON serialization.
3) It reduces the number of magic parsers.
4) It keeps the interval orthogonal to the type used in the interval.
On 4): While we don’t support intervals of other types than date,
time, and datetime so far, I think that we should change that and so
this would be a good step in that direction as well.
The disadvantages are
1) Incompatible AQL change
2) Incompatible ADM change
Thoughts?
Cheers,
Till
On 26 Jan 2016, at 11:46, Eldon Carman wrote:
> I found that the lossless-JSON and clean-JSON printers were not being
> used.
> After connecting them to the respective JSON printer, I ran the query
> again.
>
> lossless-JSON result:
> { "orderedlist": [ { "date-interval": { "interval": { "start": {
> "date":
> "2012-01-01" }, "end": { "date": "2013-04-01" }}} }, {
> "time-interval": {
> "interval": { "start": { "time": "12:23:34.456Z" }, "end": { "time":
> "15:34:45.567Z" }}} }, { "datetime-interval": { "interval": { "start":
> {
> "datetime": "2012-01-01T04:23:34.456Z" }, "end": { "datetime":
> "2013-04-01T15:34:45.567Z" }}} } ] }
>
>
> clean-JSON result:
> [ { "date-interval": { "interval": { "start": "2012-01-01", "end":
> "2013-04-01"}} }, { "time-interval": { "interval": { "start":
> "12:23:34.456Z", "end": "15:34:45.567Z"}} }, { "datetime-interval": {
> "interval": { "start": "2012-01-01T04:23:34.456Z", "end":
> "2013-04-01T15:34:45.567Z"}} } ]
>
> Is this what you would have expected?
>
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 7:07 PM, Eldon Carman <ec...@ucr.edu>
> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks Chris for adding a fourth option. This option would focus our
> updates to only the ADM output.
>>
>> Yes, both lossless-JSON and clean-JSON outputs would need to be check
> also.
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 5:58 PM, Chris Hillery
>> <ch...@hillery.land>
> wrote:
>>>
>>> I would vote for:
>>>
>>> d. Update the serialized format to output "interval-from-date" and
>>> put
> both
>>> dates in quotes.
>>>
>>> I like the function name interval-from-date() better, and I don't
>>> think
>>> there's any need to maintain backwards compatibility with the old
>>> name
>>> which clearly never worked.
>>>
>>> Couple thoughts, though: The serialized format really should be
>>> "ADM",
> not
>>> "AQL". As such I don't think it should reference functions at all.
>>> We
>>> already do this for many datatypes, such as uuid("...") and
>>> datetime("..."). Are those truly "Functions"? Are they
>>> "constructors",
> and
>>> is that different? In any case, the answer for interval types should
>>> be
>>> consistent with that.
>>>
>>> Final note: quite possibly the lossless-JSON and clean-JSON outputs
>>> for
>>> intervals are broken as well, and should be fixed.
>>>
>>> Ceej
>>> aka Chris Hillery
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Till Westmann <ti...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Voting for a. Seems to be the least redundant option.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Till
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 25 Jan 2016, at 16:47, Eldon Carman wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The interval field value printed in the ADM results can not be used
>>>> to
>>>>> create an interval.
>>>>>
>>>>> Intervals have several functions that are used to construct an
> interval:
>>>>> interval-from-date/time/datetime
>>>>> and interval-start-from-date/time/datetime. It appears that this
>>>>> is
> the
>>>>> only way to create an interval. Thus, a user must use one of these
>>>>> function
>>>>> to create an interval.
>>>>>
>>>>> The following query shows how to create three intervals.
>>>>>
>>>>> Query:
>>>>> let $di := {"date-interval": interval-from-date("2012-01-01",
>>>>> "2013-04-01")}
>>>>> let $ti := {"time-interval": interval-from-time("12:23:34.456Z",
>>>>> "233445567+0800")}
>>>>> let $dti := {"datetime-interval":
>>>>> interval-from-datetime("2012-01-01T12:23:34.456+08:00",
>>>>> "20130401T153445567Z")}
>>>>> return [$di, $ti, $dti];
>>>>>
>>>>> Result:
>>>>> { "date-interval": interval-date("2012-01-01, 2013-04-01") }, {
>>>>> "time-interval": interval-time("12:23:34.456Z, 15:34:45.567Z") },
>>>>> {
>>>>> "datetime-interval": interval-datetime("2012-01-01T04:23:34.456Z,
>>>>> 2013-04-01T15:34:45.567Z") } ]
>>>>>
>>>>> Notice the results show interval-date("date, date") which is
>>>>> different
>>>>> than
>>>>> the functions that are used to create a date interval. Notice that
>>>>> interval-date does not exists in AsterixDB and that the input is a
> single
>>>>> string of dates separated by a comma. Below are some ideas on how
>>>>> to
>>>>> create
>>>>> a round-trip for intervals.
>>>>>
>>>>> Options for round tripping:
>>>>> a: Rename "interval-from-date" to "interval-date" and update the
> output to
>>>>> put both dates in quotes.
>>>>> b: Add alias for "interval-from-date" to "interval-date" and
>>>>> update
> the
>>>>> output to put both dates in quotes.
>>>>> c: Create an interval date constructor (called interval-date) that
>>>>> can
>>>>> parse the string "date, date".
>>>>>
>>>>> The same process should be used for intervals with time and
>>>>> datetime.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
Re: Round Tripping ADM Interval Data
Posted by Eldon Carman <ec...@ucr.edu>.
I found that the lossless-JSON and clean-JSON printers were not being used.
After connecting them to the respective JSON printer, I ran the query again.
lossless-JSON result:
{ "orderedlist": [ { "date-interval": { "interval": { "start": { "date":
"2012-01-01" }, "end": { "date": "2013-04-01" }}} }, { "time-interval": {
"interval": { "start": { "time": "12:23:34.456Z" }, "end": { "time":
"15:34:45.567Z" }}} }, { "datetime-interval": { "interval": { "start": {
"datetime": "2012-01-01T04:23:34.456Z" }, "end": { "datetime":
"2013-04-01T15:34:45.567Z" }}} } ] }
clean-JSON result:
[ { "date-interval": { "interval": { "start": "2012-01-01", "end":
"2013-04-01"}} }, { "time-interval": { "interval": { "start":
"12:23:34.456Z", "end": "15:34:45.567Z"}} }, { "datetime-interval": {
"interval": { "start": "2012-01-01T04:23:34.456Z", "end":
"2013-04-01T15:34:45.567Z"}} } ]
Is this what you would have expected?
On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 7:07 PM, Eldon Carman <ec...@ucr.edu> wrote:
>
> Thanks Chris for adding a fourth option. This option would focus our
updates to only the ADM output.
>
> Yes, both lossless-JSON and clean-JSON outputs would need to be check
also.
>
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 5:58 PM, Chris Hillery <ch...@hillery.land>
wrote:
>>
>> I would vote for:
>>
>> d. Update the serialized format to output "interval-from-date" and put
both
>> dates in quotes.
>>
>> I like the function name interval-from-date() better, and I don't think
>> there's any need to maintain backwards compatibility with the old name
>> which clearly never worked.
>>
>> Couple thoughts, though: The serialized format really should be "ADM",
not
>> "AQL". As such I don't think it should reference functions at all. We
>> already do this for many datatypes, such as uuid("...") and
>> datetime("..."). Are those truly "Functions"? Are they "constructors",
and
>> is that different? In any case, the answer for interval types should be
>> consistent with that.
>>
>> Final note: quite possibly the lossless-JSON and clean-JSON outputs for
>> intervals are broken as well, and should be fixed.
>>
>> Ceej
>> aka Chris Hillery
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Till Westmann <ti...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> > Voting for a. Seems to be the least redundant option.
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> > Till
>> >
>> >
>> > On 25 Jan 2016, at 16:47, Eldon Carman wrote:
>> >
>> > The interval field value printed in the ADM results can not be used to
>> >> create an interval.
>> >>
>> >> Intervals have several functions that are used to construct an
interval:
>> >> interval-from-date/time/datetime
>> >> and interval-start-from-date/time/datetime. It appears that this is
the
>> >> only way to create an interval. Thus, a user must use one of these
>> >> function
>> >> to create an interval.
>> >>
>> >> The following query shows how to create three intervals.
>> >>
>> >> Query:
>> >> let $di := {"date-interval": interval-from-date("2012-01-01",
>> >> "2013-04-01")}
>> >> let $ti := {"time-interval": interval-from-time("12:23:34.456Z",
>> >> "233445567+0800")}
>> >> let $dti := {"datetime-interval":
>> >> interval-from-datetime("2012-01-01T12:23:34.456+08:00",
>> >> "20130401T153445567Z")}
>> >> return [$di, $ti, $dti];
>> >>
>> >> Result:
>> >> { "date-interval": interval-date("2012-01-01, 2013-04-01") }, {
>> >> "time-interval": interval-time("12:23:34.456Z, 15:34:45.567Z") }, {
>> >> "datetime-interval": interval-datetime("2012-01-01T04:23:34.456Z,
>> >> 2013-04-01T15:34:45.567Z") } ]
>> >>
>> >> Notice the results show interval-date("date, date") which is different
>> >> than
>> >> the functions that are used to create a date interval. Notice that
>> >> interval-date does not exists in AsterixDB and that the input is a
single
>> >> string of dates separated by a comma. Below are some ideas on how to
>> >> create
>> >> a round-trip for intervals.
>> >>
>> >> Options for round tripping:
>> >> a: Rename "interval-from-date" to "interval-date" and update the
output to
>> >> put both dates in quotes.
>> >> b: Add alias for "interval-from-date" to "interval-date" and update
the
>> >> output to put both dates in quotes.
>> >> c: Create an interval date constructor (called interval-date) that can
>> >> parse the string "date, date".
>> >>
>> >> The same process should be used for intervals with time and datetime.
>> >>
>> >> Thoughts?
>> >>
>> >
>
>
Re: Round Tripping ADM Interval Data
Posted by Eldon Carman <ec...@ucr.edu>.
Thanks Chris for adding a fourth option. This option would focus our
updates to only the ADM output.
Yes, both lossless-JSON and clean-JSON outputs would need to be check also.
On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 5:58 PM, Chris Hillery <ch...@hillery.land>
wrote:
> I would vote for:
>
> d. Update the serialized format to output "interval-from-date" and put both
> dates in quotes.
>
> I like the function name interval-from-date() better, and I don't think
> there's any need to maintain backwards compatibility with the old name
> which clearly never worked.
>
> Couple thoughts, though: The serialized format really should be "ADM", not
> "AQL". As such I don't think it should reference functions at all. We
> already do this for many datatypes, such as uuid("...") and
> datetime("..."). Are those truly "Functions"? Are they "constructors", and
> is that different? In any case, the answer for interval types should be
> consistent with that.
>
> Final note: quite possibly the lossless-JSON and clean-JSON outputs for
> intervals are broken as well, and should be fixed.
>
> Ceej
> aka Chris Hillery
>
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Till Westmann <ti...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Voting for a. Seems to be the least redundant option.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Till
> >
> >
> > On 25 Jan 2016, at 16:47, Eldon Carman wrote:
> >
> > The interval field value printed in the ADM results can not be used to
> >> create an interval.
> >>
> >> Intervals have several functions that are used to construct an interval:
> >> interval-from-date/time/datetime
> >> and interval-start-from-date/time/datetime. It appears that this is the
> >> only way to create an interval. Thus, a user must use one of these
> >> function
> >> to create an interval.
> >>
> >> The following query shows how to create three intervals.
> >>
> >> Query:
> >> let $di := {"date-interval": interval-from-date("2012-01-01",
> >> "2013-04-01")}
> >> let $ti := {"time-interval": interval-from-time("12:23:34.456Z",
> >> "233445567+0800")}
> >> let $dti := {"datetime-interval":
> >> interval-from-datetime("2012-01-01T12:23:34.456+08:00",
> >> "20130401T153445567Z")}
> >> return [$di, $ti, $dti];
> >>
> >> Result:
> >> { "date-interval": interval-date("2012-01-01, 2013-04-01") }, {
> >> "time-interval": interval-time("12:23:34.456Z, 15:34:45.567Z") }, {
> >> "datetime-interval": interval-datetime("2012-01-01T04:23:34.456Z,
> >> 2013-04-01T15:34:45.567Z") } ]
> >>
> >> Notice the results show interval-date("date, date") which is different
> >> than
> >> the functions that are used to create a date interval. Notice that
> >> interval-date does not exists in AsterixDB and that the input is a
> single
> >> string of dates separated by a comma. Below are some ideas on how to
> >> create
> >> a round-trip for intervals.
> >>
> >> Options for round tripping:
> >> a: Rename "interval-from-date" to "interval-date" and update the output
> to
> >> put both dates in quotes.
> >> b: Add alias for "interval-from-date" to "interval-date" and update the
> >> output to put both dates in quotes.
> >> c: Create an interval date constructor (called interval-date) that can
> >> parse the string "date, date".
> >>
> >> The same process should be used for intervals with time and datetime.
> >>
> >> Thoughts?
> >>
> >
>
Re: Round Tripping ADM Interval Data
Posted by Chris Hillery <ch...@hillery.land>.
I would vote for:
d. Update the serialized format to output "interval-from-date" and put both
dates in quotes.
I like the function name interval-from-date() better, and I don't think
there's any need to maintain backwards compatibility with the old name
which clearly never worked.
Couple thoughts, though: The serialized format really should be "ADM", not
"AQL". As such I don't think it should reference functions at all. We
already do this for many datatypes, such as uuid("...") and
datetime("..."). Are those truly "Functions"? Are they "constructors", and
is that different? In any case, the answer for interval types should be
consistent with that.
Final note: quite possibly the lossless-JSON and clean-JSON outputs for
intervals are broken as well, and should be fixed.
Ceej
aka Chris Hillery
On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Till Westmann <ti...@apache.org> wrote:
> Voting for a. Seems to be the least redundant option.
>
> Cheers,
> Till
>
>
> On 25 Jan 2016, at 16:47, Eldon Carman wrote:
>
> The interval field value printed in the ADM results can not be used to
>> create an interval.
>>
>> Intervals have several functions that are used to construct an interval:
>> interval-from-date/time/datetime
>> and interval-start-from-date/time/datetime. It appears that this is the
>> only way to create an interval. Thus, a user must use one of these
>> function
>> to create an interval.
>>
>> The following query shows how to create three intervals.
>>
>> Query:
>> let $di := {"date-interval": interval-from-date("2012-01-01",
>> "2013-04-01")}
>> let $ti := {"time-interval": interval-from-time("12:23:34.456Z",
>> "233445567+0800")}
>> let $dti := {"datetime-interval":
>> interval-from-datetime("2012-01-01T12:23:34.456+08:00",
>> "20130401T153445567Z")}
>> return [$di, $ti, $dti];
>>
>> Result:
>> { "date-interval": interval-date("2012-01-01, 2013-04-01") }, {
>> "time-interval": interval-time("12:23:34.456Z, 15:34:45.567Z") }, {
>> "datetime-interval": interval-datetime("2012-01-01T04:23:34.456Z,
>> 2013-04-01T15:34:45.567Z") } ]
>>
>> Notice the results show interval-date("date, date") which is different
>> than
>> the functions that are used to create a date interval. Notice that
>> interval-date does not exists in AsterixDB and that the input is a single
>> string of dates separated by a comma. Below are some ideas on how to
>> create
>> a round-trip for intervals.
>>
>> Options for round tripping:
>> a: Rename "interval-from-date" to "interval-date" and update the output to
>> put both dates in quotes.
>> b: Add alias for "interval-from-date" to "interval-date" and update the
>> output to put both dates in quotes.
>> c: Create an interval date constructor (called interval-date) that can
>> parse the string "date, date".
>>
>> The same process should be used for intervals with time and datetime.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>
Re: Round Tripping ADM Interval Data
Posted by Yingyi Bu <bu...@gmail.com>.
+1.
Best,
Yingyi
On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Till Westmann <ti...@apache.org> wrote:
> Voting for a. Seems to be the least redundant option.
>
> Cheers,
> Till
>
>
> On 25 Jan 2016, at 16:47, Eldon Carman wrote:
>
> The interval field value printed in the ADM results can not be used to
>> create an interval.
>>
>> Intervals have several functions that are used to construct an interval:
>> interval-from-date/time/datetime
>> and interval-start-from-date/time/datetime. It appears that this is the
>> only way to create an interval. Thus, a user must use one of these
>> function
>> to create an interval.
>>
>> The following query shows how to create three intervals.
>>
>> Query:
>> let $di := {"date-interval": interval-from-date("2012-01-01",
>> "2013-04-01")}
>> let $ti := {"time-interval": interval-from-time("12:23:34.456Z",
>> "233445567+0800")}
>> let $dti := {"datetime-interval":
>> interval-from-datetime("2012-01-01T12:23:34.456+08:00",
>> "20130401T153445567Z")}
>> return [$di, $ti, $dti];
>>
>> Result:
>> { "date-interval": interval-date("2012-01-01, 2013-04-01") }, {
>> "time-interval": interval-time("12:23:34.456Z, 15:34:45.567Z") }, {
>> "datetime-interval": interval-datetime("2012-01-01T04:23:34.456Z,
>> 2013-04-01T15:34:45.567Z") } ]
>>
>> Notice the results show interval-date("date, date") which is different
>> than
>> the functions that are used to create a date interval. Notice that
>> interval-date does not exists in AsterixDB and that the input is a single
>> string of dates separated by a comma. Below are some ideas on how to
>> create
>> a round-trip for intervals.
>>
>> Options for round tripping:
>> a: Rename "interval-from-date" to "interval-date" and update the output to
>> put both dates in quotes.
>> b: Add alias for "interval-from-date" to "interval-date" and update the
>> output to put both dates in quotes.
>> c: Create an interval date constructor (called interval-date) that can
>> parse the string "date, date".
>>
>> The same process should be used for intervals with time and datetime.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>
Re: Round Tripping ADM Interval Data
Posted by Till Westmann <ti...@apache.org>.
Voting for a. Seems to be the least redundant option.
Cheers,
Till
On 25 Jan 2016, at 16:47, Eldon Carman wrote:
> The interval field value printed in the ADM results can not be used to
> create an interval.
>
> Intervals have several functions that are used to construct an
> interval:
> interval-from-date/time/datetime
> and interval-start-from-date/time/datetime. It appears that this is
> the
> only way to create an interval. Thus, a user must use one of these
> function
> to create an interval.
>
> The following query shows how to create three intervals.
>
> Query:
> let $di := {"date-interval": interval-from-date("2012-01-01",
> "2013-04-01")}
> let $ti := {"time-interval": interval-from-time("12:23:34.456Z",
> "233445567+0800")}
> let $dti := {"datetime-interval":
> interval-from-datetime("2012-01-01T12:23:34.456+08:00",
> "20130401T153445567Z")}
> return [$di, $ti, $dti];
>
> Result:
> { "date-interval": interval-date("2012-01-01, 2013-04-01") }, {
> "time-interval": interval-time("12:23:34.456Z, 15:34:45.567Z") }, {
> "datetime-interval": interval-datetime("2012-01-01T04:23:34.456Z,
> 2013-04-01T15:34:45.567Z") } ]
>
> Notice the results show interval-date("date, date") which is different
> than
> the functions that are used to create a date interval. Notice that
> interval-date does not exists in AsterixDB and that the input is a
> single
> string of dates separated by a comma. Below are some ideas on how to
> create
> a round-trip for intervals.
>
> Options for round tripping:
> a: Rename "interval-from-date" to "interval-date" and update the
> output to
> put both dates in quotes.
> b: Add alias for "interval-from-date" to "interval-date" and update
> the
> output to put both dates in quotes.
> c: Create an interval date constructor (called interval-date) that can
> parse the string "date, date".
>
> The same process should be used for intervals with time and datetime.
>
> Thoughts?