This repository was archived by the owner on Jun 15, 2021. It is now read-only.
Add filter factory #15
Open
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
massdosage
reviewed
Jul 28, 2020
massdosage
left a comment
massdosage
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good so far, just needs some tests like you said.
mr/src/main/java/org/apache/iceberg/mr/hive/HiveIcebergFilterFactory.java
Show resolved
Hide resolved
massdosage
force-pushed
the
hive-filter-pushdown
branch
from
0b9c046 to
4b8ca3e
Compare
Fix date and timestamp conversion
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I added in our FilterFactory class and decided to add the logic to convert the filter from Hive -> Iceberg in the IF, add it to the current JobConf because applying the filter is handled in the an inner IF (at the base IcebergInputFormat class).
I was trying to see if there was a better way to do it from the StorageHandler instead but it required a few work arounds, so this seemed simpler. Will add tests in a bit :))