On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 1:53 AM, Alexei Scherbakov < alexey.scherbak...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > > 5. I have the same understanding. Distributed joins will ignore > the > >> > > > setting. > >> > > > This is not implemented yet.. > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > And again, this will be very confusing to users. Any chance we can > >> throw > >> > an > >> > > exception with a proper error message here? > >> > > > >> > > >> > I hope to make it working too. But first I need a review of current PR > >> > state to understand whether I'm moving in right direction or not. > >> > > >> > >> What behavior are you proposing to implement? > >> > >> Alexey, I have noticed in your comments that you are adding this support > >> only for the SQL queries. Why not make it consistent across all the > >> queries? > >> > > > > Initially I had no such intentions, because I do not use other query > types. > > But if the community has the need of this, why not. > > I'll start working on it next week. > > > Alexey, I think ScanQueries already had this support. If you are deprecating the old methods, then you need to move this logic to the new methods. Also, what behavior are you implementing for the distributed joins? D.
