You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@drill.apache.org by GitBox <gi...@apache.org> on 2022/02/03 07:02:05 UTC
[GitHub] [drill] paul-rogers opened a new pull request #2450: DRILL-8123: Revise scan limit pushdown
paul-rogers opened a new pull request #2450:
URL: https://github.com/apache/drill/pull/2450
# [DRILL-8123](https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DRILL-8123): Revise scan limit pushdown
## Description
Recent work added a push down of the limit into a scan. The work had a few holes, one of which was plugged by the recent update of EVF to manage the limit. Another hole is that the physical plan uses a value of 0 to indicate no limit, but 0 is a perfectly valid limit, it means "no data, only schema." The field name is "maxRecords", but should be "limit" to indicate the purpose.
## Documentation
N/A
## Testing
Reran unit tests.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@drill.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [drill] jnturton commented on pull request #2450: DRILL-8123: Revise scan limit pushdown
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
jnturton commented on pull request #2450:
URL: https://github.com/apache/drill/pull/2450#issuecomment-1028677289
Thank you for reworking these PRs @paul-rogers. It was only the timestamp fixes that I really felt should receive separate review, but these incremental PRs are great. Should I close the monolithic #2419, or switch it to draft, so that it's clear we should not merge that one?
Anecdote: I had to look at a LIMIT 0 query against Parquet yesterday and saw that the Parquet reader reads a single batch of data anyway, even though I don't believe there's any need for it to. All "limit 0 shortcut" config opts that I could see were enabled. I know the present-day Parquet readers are their own animals entirely, entirely unlike EVF style readers, but I thought this anecdote might be of interest since the same LIMIT 0 case is being addressed here.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@drill.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [drill] jnturton merged pull request #2450: DRILL-8123: Revise scan limit pushdown
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
jnturton merged pull request #2450:
URL: https://github.com/apache/drill/pull/2450
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@drill.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
[GitHub] [drill] paul-rogers commented on pull request #2450: DRILL-8123: Revise scan limit pushdown
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
paul-rogers commented on pull request #2450:
URL: https://github.com/apache/drill/pull/2450#issuecomment-1028704625
@jnturton, you an mark the big one as a draft. It will still contain the EVF V2 roll-out (only), all the other stuff will be done in other PRs. Actually, I think that one is the next one up after the two today are merged. Then, the two readers converted to EVF V2 will follow in additional PRs. The stuff you don't like, the date/time fixes, I'm omitting. The result is that I can't test on my machine, so I'm letting GitHub run the tests: it must operate in the UTC time zone.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@drill.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org