> On Aug. 29, 2017, 6:28 p.m., Gopal V wrote:
> > ql/src/test/results/clientpositive/llap/dynamic_semijoin_reduction.q.out
> > Line 2667 (original), 2893 (patched)
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/61956/diff/2/?file=1807067#file1807067line2893>
> >
> >     Result change?
> 
> Deepak Jaiswal wrote:
>     There are two changes to the tests.
>     1. An accidental copy-paste mistake led to same test being used twice, 
> that was fixed causing the results to change. (notice the query modification 
> in .q file)
>     2. Added a new test for which new results are added to the output.

Oh wait, I missed this, let me take a look.


- Deepak


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/61956/#review184080
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Aug. 29, 2017, 6:24 p.m., Deepak Jaiswal wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/61956/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Aug. 29, 2017, 6:24 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for hive, Gopal V and Jason Dere.
> 
> 
> Bugs: HIVE-17323
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-17323
> 
> 
> Repository: hive-git
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> HIVE-16260 allows removal of parallel edges of semijoin with mapjoins.
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-16260
> However, it should also consider dynamic partition pruning edge like semijoin 
> without removing it while traversing the query tree.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   ql/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/ql/parse/TezCompiler.java 1671773d4a 
>   ql/src/test/queries/clientpositive/dynamic_semijoin_reduction.q b22890bc9d 
>   ql/src/test/results/clientpositive/llap/dynamic_semijoin_reduction.q.out 
> 478b0828a3 
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/61956/diff/2/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Deepak Jaiswal
> 
>

Reply via email to