Lack a response doesn't necessarily means "don't care". Maybe you can have a good description of the problem and proposed solution. Frankly I cannot make much sense out of the previous email.
Thanks, Xuefu On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 5:05 PM, Sergey Shelukhin <ser...@hortonworks.com> wrote: > Looks like nobody does… I’ll file a ticket to remove it shortly. > > From: Sergey Shelukhin <ser...@hortonworks.com<mailto: > ser...@hortonworks.com>> > Date: Tuesday, October 3, 2017 at 12:59 > To: "u...@hive.apache.org<mailto:u...@hive.apache.org>" < > u...@hive.apache.org<mailto:u...@hive.apache.org>>, "dev@hive.apache.org > <mailto:dev@hive.apache.org>" <dev@hive.apache.org<mailto:de > v...@hive.apache.org>> > Subject: does anyone care about list bucketing stored as directories? > > 1) There seem to be some bugs and limitations in LB (e.g. incorrect > cleanup - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-14886) and nobody > appears to as much as watch JIRAs ;) Does anyone actually use this stuff? > Should we nuke it in 3.0, and by 3.0 I mean I’ll remove it from master in a > few weeks? :) > > 2) I actually wonder, on top of the same SQL syntax, wouldn’t it be much > easier to add logic to partitioning to write skew values into partitions > and non-skew values into a new type of default partition? It won’t affect > nearly as many low level codepaths in obscure and unobvious ways, instead > keeping all the logic in metastore and split generation, and would > integrate with Hive features like PPD automatically. > Esp. if we are ok with the same limitations - e.g. if you add a new skew > value right now, I’m not sure what happens to the rows with that value > already sitting in the non-skew directories, but I don’t expect anything > reasonable... > >
