Yup. I agree that we need to make sure that both clients are in sync. I believe DRILL-4280's PR refers to making changes in both APIs as well.
Do you have a sense of how these changes give us a performance boost? As far as I can see, the APIs result in nearly the same code path being executed, with the difference being that the limit 0 query is now submitted by the server instead of the client. I don't know much about the tweaking of performance for various BI tools; is there something that Tableau et al do different? I don't see how, since the the ODBC/JDBC interface remains the same. Just trying to understand this. Anyway, any performance gain is wonderful. Do you have any numbers to share? On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 10:29 AM, Jacques Nadeau <jacq...@dremio.com> wrote: > Both the C++ and the JDBC changes are updates that leverage a number of > pre-existing APIs already on the server. Our initial evaluations, we have > already seen substantially improved BI tool performance with the proposed > changes (with no additional server side changes). Are you seeing something > different? If you haven't yet looked at the changes in that light, I > suggest you do. > > If anything, I'm more concerned about client feature proposals that don't > cover both the C++ and Java client. For example, I think we should be > cautious about merging something like DRILL-4280. We should be cautious > about introducing new server APIs unless there is a concrete plan around > support in all clients. > > So I agree with the spirit of your ask: change proposals should be > "complete". However, I don't think it reasonably applies to the changes > proposed by Laurent. His changes "complete" the already introduced metadata > and prepare apis the server exposes. It provides an improved BI user > experience. It also introduces unit tests in the C++ client, something that > was previously sorely missing. > > > > -- > Jacques Nadeau > CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio > > On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Parth Chandra <pchan...@maprtech.com> > wrote: > > > Hi guys, > > > > I won't be able to join the hangout but it would be good to discuss the > > plan for the related backend changes. > > > > As I mentioned before I would like to see a concrete proposal for the > > backend that will accompany these changes. Without that, I feel there is > no > > point to adding so much new code. > > > > Thanks > > > > Parth > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 7:52 PM, Laurent Goujon <laur...@dremio.com> > wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I'm currently working on improving metadata support for both the JDBC > > > driver and the C++ connector, more specifically the following JIRAs: > > > > > > DRILL-4853: Update C++ protobuf source files > > > DRILL-4420: Server-side metadata and prepared-statement support for C++ > > > connector > > > DRILL-4880: Support JDBC driver registration using ServiceLoader > > > DRILL-4925: Add tableType filter to GetTables metadata query > > > DRILL-4730: Update JDBC DatabaseMetaData implementation to use new > > Metadata > > > APIs > > > > > > I already opened multiple pull requests for those (the list is > available > > > at https://github.com/apache/drill/pulls/laurentgo) > > > > > > I'm planning to join tomorrow hangout in case people have questions > about > > > those. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > Laurent > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 10:28 AM, Subbu Srinivasan < > > ssriniva...@zscaler.com > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Can we close on https://github.com/apache/drill/pull/518 ? > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 10:27 AM, Sudheesh Katkam < > sudhe...@apache.org> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi drillers, > > > > > > > > > > Our bi-weekly hangout is tomorrow (10/04/16, 10 AM PT). If you have > > any > > > > > suggestions for hangout topics, you can add them to this thread. We > > > will > > > > > also ask around at the beginning of the hangout for topics. > > > > > > > > > > Thank you, > > > > > Sudheesh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
