[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2973?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16839561#comment-16839561 ]
Stamatis Zampetakis commented on CALCITE-2973: ---------------------------------------------- It seems that the majority ([~hhlai1990], [~hyuan], [~julianhyde], [~rubenql]) believes that changing the operator is better (or at least less complex) than adding a new rule. If that's the case I am willing to follow. [~rubenql] from your comments it seems that you have done a rather exhaustive review. Don't hesitate to merge the PR if you think it is done. You can mark it as LGTM-will-merge-soon and if nobody complains over the next few days you can proceed with the merge. > Allow theta joins that have equi conditions to be executed using a hash join > algorithm > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CALCITE-2973 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2973 > Project: Calcite > Issue Type: New Feature > Components: core > Affects Versions: 1.19.0 > Reporter: Lai Zhou > Priority: Minor > Labels: pull-request-available > Fix For: 1.20.0 > > Time Spent: 3h 40m > Remaining Estimate: 0h > > Now the EnumerableMergeJoinRule only supports an inner and equi join. > If users make a theta-join query for a large dataset (such as 10000*10000), > the nested-loop join process will take dozens of time than the sort-merge > join process . > So if we can apply merge-join or hash-join rule for a theta join, it will > improve the performance greatly. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)