[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-1787?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16051261#comment-16051261 ]
Zain Humayun commented on CALCITE-1787: --------------------------------------- wouldn't the "metricName" field need to be there to tell calcite which sketch to refer to? For example, {code:none} { "name" : "user", "type" : "hyperUnique", "meticName" : "user_unique" } {code} "user_unique" would not be exposed to the user, and an error would be given if they tried to use it in a query. But, when "user" is used correctly in a statement, say, count(distinct user), then the druid adapter will know to use the "user_unique" column under the hood. In this case, "user" is not actually a column in Druid anywhere, and "user_unique" is defined as a metric in the Druid ingestion spec. Also, is there a specific existing exception the adapter should throw? > thetaSketch Support for Druid Adapter > ------------------------------------- > > Key: CALCITE-1787 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-1787 > Project: Calcite > Issue Type: New Feature > Components: druid > Affects Versions: 1.12.0 > Reporter: Zain Humayun > Assignee: Zain Humayun > Priority: Minor > > Currently, the Druid adapter does not support the > [thetaSketch|http://druid.io/docs/latest/development/extensions-core/datasketches-aggregators.html] > aggregate type, which is used to measure the cardinality of a column > quickly. Many Druid instances support theta sketches, so I think it would be > a nice feature to have. > I've been looking at the Druid adapter, and propose we add a new DruidType > called {{thetaSketch}} and then add logic in the {{getJsonAggregation}} > method in class {{DruidQuery}} to generate the {{thetaSketch}} aggregate. > This will require accessing information about the columns (what data type > they are) so that the thetaSketch aggregate is only produced if the column's > type is {{thetaSketch}}. > Also, I've noticed that a {{hyperUnique}} DruidType is currently defined, but > a {{hyperUnique}} aggregate is never produced. Since both are approximate > aggregators, I could also couple in the logic for {{hyperUnique}}. > I'd love to hear your thoughts on my approach, and any suggestions you have > for this feature. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)