[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-6430?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13936015#comment-13936015
]
Lefty Leverenz commented on HIVE-6430:
--------------------------------------
This adds config parameter *hive.mapjoin.optimized.hashtable* to HiveConf.java
but doesn't give a description in hive-default.xml.template or a HiveConf.java
comment.
HIVE-6037 is going to change HiveConf.java and start generating
hive-default.xml.template from HiveConf.java, so I suggest putting the
parameter description in a jira release note. Then it can be added to the new
version of HiveConf.java after HIVE-6037 gets committed.
> MapJoin hash table has large memory overhead
> --------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HIVE-6430
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-6430
> Project: Hive
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Sergey Shelukhin
> Assignee: Sergey Shelukhin
> Attachments: HIVE-6430.01.patch, HIVE-6430.02.patch,
> HIVE-6430.03.patch, HIVE-6430.patch
>
>
> Right now, in some queries, I see that storing e.g. 4 ints (2 for key and 2
> for row) can take several hundred bytes, which is ridiculous. I am reducing
> the size of MJKey and MJRowContainer in other jiras, but in general we don't
> need to have java hash table there. We can either use primitive-friendly
> hashtable like the one from HPPC (Apache-licenced), or some variation, to map
> primitive keys to single row storage structure without an object per row
> (similar to vectorization).
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
