Re: Top-K for nested fields

[Avi Bryant <av...@dabbledb.com>]

On Tue, 13 Jan 2009, Alan Gates wrote:

> I would encourage you to open a JIRA. If people disagree with putting limit in the nested foreach they can make their arguments against it there. In general, our
> desire is to make PIg Latin fully nestable (so any keyword could be in a foreach). Adding this feature should be very simple, as limit is easy to to implement. So if > someone wanted to take this on it should not be much work. I don't have time to implement and test it, but I'm happy to provide guidance on the necessary
> changes to anyone interested.

Did this JIRA ever get opened? If so, I can't find it.

I'm also interested in this feature, and although I'm completely new
to Pig, would be willing to dive in and try to implement it given
sufficient guidance.  I'd also be interested in seeing the top() UDF
that Ankur developed as a workaround, if that's available to be
shared.

Thanks,
Avi

Re: Top-K for nested fields

[Alan Gates <ga...@yahoo-inc.com>]

AFAIK the JIRA was not opened.  Please feel free to dive in and give  
it a shot.  The committers are always happy to give guidance.  Step  
one would be to open the missing JIRA and propose a design for the fix.

Alan.

On Feb 10, 2009, at 4:44 PM, Avi Bryant wrote:

> On Tue, 13 Jan 2009, Alan Gates wrote:
>
>> I would encourage you to open a JIRA. If people disagree with  
>> putting limit in the nested foreach they can make their arguments  
>> against it there. In general, our
>> desire is to make PIg Latin fully nestable (so any keyword could be  
>> in a foreach). Adding this feature should be very simple, as limit  
>> is easy to to implement. So if > someone wanted to take this on it  
>> should not be much work. I don't have time to implement and test  
>> it, but I'm happy to provide guidance on the necessary
>> changes to anyone interested.
>
> Did this JIRA ever get opened? If so, I can't find it.
>
> I'm also interested in this feature, and although I'm completely new
> to Pig, would be willing to dive in and try to implement it given
> sufficient guidance.  I'd also be interested in seeing the top() UDF
> that Ankur developed as a workaround, if that's available to be
> shared.
>
> Thanks,
> Avi