-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/2605/
-----------------------------------------------------------

Review request for hive, Yongqiang He, Ning Zhang, and namit jain.


Summary
-------

The CompactIndexHandler determines if the reentrant query it creates is a 
candidate for using the fact the index is sorted (it has an appropriate number 
of non-partition conditions, and the query plan is of the form expected).  It 
sets the input format to HiveSortedInputFormat, and marks the FilterOperator 
for the non-partition condition.

The HiveSortedInputFormat is extends HiveInputFormat, so its splits consist of 
data from a single file, and its record reader is HiveBinarySearchRecordReader. 
 HiveBinarySearchRecordReader starts by assuming it is performing a binary 
search.  It sets the appropriate flags in IOContext, which acts as the means of 
communication between the FilterOperators and the record reader.  The 
non-partition FilterOperator is responsible for executing a comparison between 
the value in the row and column of interest and the constant.  It also provides 
the type of the generic UDF.  It sets this data in the IOContext.  As long as 
the binary search continues the FilterOperators do not forward rows to the 
operators below them.  The record reader uses the comparison and the type of 
the generic UDF to execute a binary search on the underlying RCFile until it 
finds the block of interest, or determines that if any block is of interest it 
is the last one.  The search then proceeds linearly from the beginning of the 
identified block.  If ever in the binary search a problem occurs, like the 
comparison fails for some reason, a linear search begins from the beginning of 
the data which has yet to be eliminated.

Regardless of whether or not a binary search is performed, the record reader 
attempts to end the linear search as soon as it can based on the comparison and 
the type of the generic UDF.


This addresses bug HIVE-2535.
    https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-2535


Diffs
-----

  trunk/common/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/conf/HiveConf.java 1183507 
  trunk/conf/hive-default.xml 1183507 
  
trunk/ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/exec/ExprNodeGenericFuncEvaluator.java
 1183507 
  trunk/ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/exec/FilterOperator.java 1183507 
  
trunk/ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/index/compact/CompactIndexHandler.java
 1183507 
  
trunk/ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/io/HiveBinarySearchRecordReader.java
 PRE-CREATION 
  trunk/ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/io/HiveInputFormat.java 1183507 
  trunk/ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/io/HiveRecordReader.java 1183507 
  trunk/ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/io/HiveSortedInputFormat.java 
PRE-CREATION 
  trunk/ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/io/IOContext.java 1183507 
  trunk/ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/io/RCFile.java 1183507 
  trunk/ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/io/RCFileRecordReader.java 
1183507 
  trunk/ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/plan/FilterDesc.java 1183507 
  
trunk/ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/udf/generic/GenericUDFBaseCompare.java
 1183507 
  
trunk/ql/src/test/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/hooks/VerifyHiveSortedInputFormatUsedHook.java
 PRE-CREATION 
  
trunk/ql/src/test/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/io/TestHiveBinarySearchRecordReader.java
 PRE-CREATION 
  trunk/ql/src/test/queries/clientpositive/index_compact_binary_search.q 
PRE-CREATION 
  trunk/ql/src/test/results/clientpositive/index_compact_binary_search.q.out 
PRE-CREATION 

Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/2605/diff


Testing
-------

I added a test to verify the functionality of the HiveBinarySearchRecordReader.

I also added a .q file to test that this returns the correct results when the 
underlying index is stored in an RCFile and when it is stored in as a text 
file, with all of the supported operators.

I ran the .q files to verify they still pass.

I ran some queries to verify there was a CPU benefit to doing this.  I saw as 
much as a 45% reduction in the total CPU used by the map reduce job to scan the 
index, for a large data set. 


Thanks,

Kevin

Reply via email to