[jira] Issue Comment Edited: (PIG-290) LOCross output schema is not right

["Pi Song (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-290?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12613914#action_12613914 ] 

pi_song edited comment on PIG-290 at 7/16/08 4:30 AM:
------------------------------------------------------

Sorry, I had a look at this a few days ago but forgot to reply.
I think instead of relying on  edge ordering in the graph (which is, in fact, not defined), we'd better maintain the order inside LO.

What is your opinion on this?

      was (Author: pi_song):
    Sorry, I had a look at this a few days ago but forgot to reply.
I think instead of relying on  edge ordering in the graph (which is, in fact, not defined), we'd better maintain the order inside LO.

What is your opinion of this?
  
> LOCross output schema is not right
> ----------------------------------
>
>                 Key: PIG-290
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-290
>             Project: Pig
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: impl
>    Affects Versions: types_branch
>            Reporter: Pi Song
>            Assignee: Santhosh Srinivasan
>             Fix For: types_branch
>
>         Attachments: insert_between.patch
>
>
> From the schema generation code:-
> {noformat}
>         List<LogicalOperator> inputs = mPlan.getPredecessors(this);
>             for (LogicalOperator op : inputs) {
>                     // Create schema here
>             }
> {noformat}
> The output schema is generated based on inputs determined in the logical plan. However,  mPlan.getPredecessors() doesn't always preserve the right order  (A x B and B x A result in different schemas). I suggest maintaining mInputs variable in LOCross (as it used to be) to resolve this issue.

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