-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26694/#review57273
-----------------------------------------------------------


This looks pretty good to me overall, thanks for doing this!  I just have some 
minor comments.


datafu-pig/src/main/java/datafu/pig/bags/BagJoin.java
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/26694/#comment97829>

    Doc not accurate



datafu-pig/src/main/java/datafu/pig/bags/BagJoin.java
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/26694/#comment97822>

    I think "full" would be better than "outer".  Thoughts?



datafu-pig/src/main/java/datafu/pig/bags/BagJoin.java
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/26694/#comment97824>

    An enum with values LEFT and FULL would be clearer than two flags probably.



datafu-pig/src/main/java/datafu/pig/bags/BagJoin.java
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/26694/#comment97828>

    comment not accurate


- Matthew Hayes


On Oct. 14, 2014, 5:49 p.m., Jason Reid wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/26694/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Oct. 14, 2014, 5:49 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for DataFu.
> 
> 
> Repository: datafu
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> DATAFU-70: Add BagFullOuterJoin
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   datafu-pig/src/main/java/datafu/pig/bags/BagJoin.java PRE-CREATION 
>   datafu-pig/src/main/java/datafu/pig/bags/BagLeftOuterJoin.java ba6bc11 
>   datafu-pig/src/test/java/datafu/test/pig/bags/BagTests.java 6d21dbe 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/26694/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Added bagJoinFullOuterTest to BagTests which uses the same input as the 
> bagLeftOuterJoinTest but asserts the full outer join logic in the output.  I 
> have also refactored the existing BagLeftOuterJoin class to use the generic 
> BagJoin class and the existing test continues to pass without modification.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jason Reid
> 
>

Reply via email to