-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/50155/#review142693
-----------------------------------------------------------




src/java/org/apache/sqoop/manager/oracle/OraOopOracleQueries.java (line 972)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/50155/#comment208334>

    This should be fine to disable the validation to improve performance as we 
should have already inserted into the correct staging tables.



src/java/org/apache/sqoop/manager/oracle/OraOopOutputFormatInsert.java (line 
242)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/50155/#comment208333>

    Have you done extensive testing with all data types for this change? 
Originally Sqoop didn't work too well with Oracle data types which is why there 
is code here to do different things with bind variables based on the data type. 
Also this means there will now be a different code path for update/merge export 
jobs compared to insert jobs so I think it would be best to fix it in 
OraOopOutputFormatBase if you want to improve the performance then the new code 
can be used for all job types.


- David Robson


On July 18, 2016, 7:19 p.m., Attila Szabo wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/50155/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated July 18, 2016, 7:19 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Sqoop, David Robson, Jarek Cecho, and Kathleen Ting.
> 
> 
> Repository: sqoop-trunk
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Proposed changes for SQOOP-2983
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/java/org/apache/sqoop/manager/oracle/OraOopOracleQueries.java 82e4266 
>   src/java/org/apache/sqoop/manager/oracle/OraOopOutputFormatInsert.java 
> d5eebf4 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/50155/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 800 columns with table
> 100.000 lines (156mb data)
> 1.000.000 lines (1.56 GB data)
> 3.000.000 lines (4.5 GB data)
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Attila Szabo
> 
>

Reply via email to