[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DRILL-4857?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15433761#comment-15433761 ]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on DRILL-4857: --------------------------------------- Github user jinfengni commented on a diff in the pull request: https://github.com/apache/drill/pull/575#discussion_r75963852 --- Diff: exec/java-exec/src/main/java/org/apache/drill/exec/planner/logical/partition/PruneScanRule.java --- @@ -520,4 +531,10 @@ private static boolean isQualifiedDirPruning(final TableScan scan) { return false; } + private static void setNotPruned(MetadataContext metaContext) { --- End diff -- What about setPruneStatus(MetadataContext metaContext, PruneStatus status)? Then, both setNotPruned() and code on line 437-440 could share this call. > When no partition pruning occurs with metadata caching there's a performance > regression > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: DRILL-4857 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DRILL-4857 > Project: Apache Drill > Issue Type: Bug > Components: Metadata, Query Planning & Optimization > Affects Versions: 1.7.0 > Reporter: Aman Sinha > Assignee: Aman Sinha > Fix For: 1.8.0 > > > After DRILL-4530, we see the (expected) performance improvements in planning > time with metadata cache for cases where partition pruning got applied. > However, in cases where it did not get applied and for sufficiently large > number of files (tested with up to 400K files), there's performance > regression. Part of this was addressed by DRILL-4846. This JIRA is to > track some remaining fixes to address the regression. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)