Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[FLINK-19789][hive] Migrate Hive connector to new table source sink interface #13771

Merged
merged 7 commits into from Oct 28, 2020

Conversation

JingsongLi
Copy link
Contributor

What is the purpose of the change

Migrate Hive connector to new table source sink interface

Brief change log

  • Remove HiveTableFactory Hive logical
  • Implement Hive table source/sink logical in HiveDynamicTableFactory
  • Modify HiveTableSource
  • Modify HiveTableSink

Verifying this change

This change is already covered by existing tests

Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:

  • Dependencies (does it add or upgrade a dependency): no
  • The public API, i.e., is any changed class annotated with @Public(Evolving): no
  • The serializers: no
  • The runtime per-record code paths (performance sensitive): no
  • Anything that affects deployment or recovery: JobManager (and its components), Checkpointing, Kubernetes/Yarn/Mesos, ZooKeeper: no
  • The S3 file system connector: no

Documentation

  • Does this pull request introduce a new feature? no

@flinkbot
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks a lot for your contribution to the Apache Flink project. I'm the @flinkbot. I help the community
to review your pull request. We will use this comment to track the progress of the review.

Automated Checks

Last check on commit 03bad16 (Fri Oct 23 12:23:36 UTC 2020)

Warnings:

  • No documentation files were touched! Remember to keep the Flink docs up to date!

Mention the bot in a comment to re-run the automated checks.

Review Progress

  • ❓ 1. The [description] looks good.
  • ❓ 2. There is [consensus] that the contribution should go into to Flink.
  • ❓ 3. Needs [attention] from.
  • ❓ 4. The change fits into the overall [architecture].
  • ❓ 5. Overall code [quality] is good.

Please see the Pull Request Review Guide for a full explanation of the review process.


The Bot is tracking the review progress through labels. Labels are applied according to the order of the review items. For consensus, approval by a Flink committer of PMC member is required Bot commands
The @flinkbot bot supports the following commands:

  • @flinkbot approve description to approve one or more aspects (aspects: description, consensus, architecture and quality)
  • @flinkbot approve all to approve all aspects
  • @flinkbot approve-until architecture to approve everything until architecture
  • @flinkbot attention @username1 [@username2 ..] to require somebody's attention
  • @flinkbot disapprove architecture to remove an approval you gave earlier

@flinkbot
Copy link
Collaborator

flinkbot commented Oct 23, 2020

CI report:

Bot commands The @flinkbot bot supports the following commands:
  • @flinkbot run travis re-run the last Travis build
  • @flinkbot run azure re-run the last Azure build

Copy link
Member

@fsk119 fsk119 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for your contribution. The modification of the rule and the corresponding tests look good to me except the minor problem.

@@ -239,46 +239,40 @@ public RexNode visitInputRef(RexInputRef inputRef) {
// get partitions from table/catalog and prune
Optional<Catalog> catalogOptional = context.getCatalogManager().getCatalog(tableSourceTable.tableIdentifier().getCatalogName());
List<Map<String, String>> remainingPartitions;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Unused field remainingPartitions

public void applyPartitions(List<Map<String, String>> remainingPartitions) {
if (catalogTable.getPartitionKeys() != null && catalogTable.getPartitionKeys().size() != 0) {
this.remainingPartitions = remainingPartitions;
}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should we report error for the else branch ?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we can

Copy link
Contributor

@danny0405 danny0405 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

+1

@JingsongLi
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks @fsk119 @danny0405 for the review, merging...

@JingsongLi JingsongLi merged commit 0a14ad1 into apache:master Oct 28, 2020
@JingsongLi JingsongLi deleted the hiveNewTableSource branch November 5, 2020 09:37
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
5 participants