[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DRILL-4743?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15382838#comment-15382838 ]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on DRILL-4743: --------------------------------------- Github user sudheeshkatkam commented on a diff in the pull request: https://github.com/apache/drill/pull/534#discussion_r71207858 --- Diff: exec/java-exec/src/main/java/org/apache/drill/exec/planner/physical/PlannerSettings.java --- @@ -212,6 +219,14 @@ public static long getInitialPlanningMemorySize() { return INITIAL_OFF_HEAP_ALLOCATION_IN_BYTES; } + public double getFilterMinSelectivityEstimateFactor() { + return options.getOption(FILTER_MIN_SELECTIVITY_ESTIMATE_FACTOR.getOptionName()).float_val; --- End diff -- Make the option validators above typed: `public static final FloatValidator FILTER_MIN_SELECTIVITY_ESTIMATE_FACTOR ...` and change this line to: `return options.getOption(FILTER_MIN_SELECTIVITY_ESTIMATE_FACTOR);` Same for the other option. > HashJoin's not fully parallelized in query plan > ----------------------------------------------- > > Key: DRILL-4743 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DRILL-4743 > Project: Apache Drill > Issue Type: Bug > Affects Versions: 1.5.0 > Reporter: Gautam Kumar Parai > Assignee: Gautam Kumar Parai > Labels: doc-impacting > > The underlying problem is filter selectivity under-estimate for a query with > complicated predicates e.g. deeply nested and/or predicates. This leads to > under parallelization of the major fragment doing the join. > To really resolve this problem we need table/column statistics to correctly > estimate the selectivity. However, in the absence of statistics OR even when > existing statistics are insufficient to get a correct estimate of selectivity > this will serve as a workaround. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)