[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-23553?focusedWorklogId=545312&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:worklog-tabpanel#worklog-545312
 ]

ASF GitHub Bot logged work on HIVE-23553:
-----------------------------------------

                Author: ASF GitHub Bot
            Created on: 01/Feb/21 13:03
            Start Date: 01/Feb/21 13:03
    Worklog Time Spent: 10m 
      Work Description: pgaref commented on a change in pull request #1823:
URL: https://github.com/apache/hive/pull/1823#discussion_r567807669



##########
File path: common/src/java/org/apache/hadoop/hive/conf/HiveConf.java
##########
@@ -4509,7 +4509,7 @@ private static void populateLlapDaemonVarsSet(Set<String> 
llapDaemonVarsSetLocal
         "Minimum allocation possible from LLAP buddy allocator. Allocations 
below that are\n" +
         "padded to minimum allocation. For ORC, should generally be the same 
as the expected\n" +
         "compression buffer size, or next lowest power of 2. Must be a power 
of 2."),
-    LLAP_ALLOCATOR_MAX_ALLOC("hive.llap.io.allocator.alloc.max", "16Mb", new 
SizeValidator(),
+    LLAP_ALLOCATOR_MAX_ALLOC("hive.llap.io.allocator.alloc.max", "4Mb", new 
SizeValidator(),

Review comment:
       The issue here is that LLAP_ALLOCATOR_MAX_ALLOC is also used as the ORC 
Writer buffer size (thus the change).
   
   Initial buffer size check was introduced in 
[ORC-238](https://github.com/apache/orc/pull/171/files) even though it was only 
applied when buffer size was enforced from table properties. Later, on ORC-1.6 
this was enforced for the [Writer buffer size in 
general](https://github.com/apache/orc/blob/0128f817b0ab28fa2d0660737234ac966f0f5c50/java/core/src/java/org/apache/orc/impl/WriterImpl.java#L171).
   
   The max bufferSize argument can be up to 2^(3*8 - 1) -- meaning less than 
8Mb and since we enforce the size to be power of 2 the next available is 4Mb.
   
   The main question here is if there is a reason for the upper limit to be < 8 
Mb (cc @prasanthj that might know more here) -- or if we should decouple the 
two configuration (LLAP alloc and ORC Writer buffer size).
   
   I believe the best thing to do for now is open a new Ticket to track this 
(as this will either require more work on LLAP, or a new release on ORC) -- and 
I do not expect this to cause any major issues until then. @mustafaiman what do 
you think?




----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


Issue Time Tracking
-------------------

    Worklog Id:     (was: 545312)
    Time Spent: 5h 50m  (was: 5h 40m)

> Upgrade ORC version to 1.6.7
> ----------------------------
>
>                 Key: HIVE-23553
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-23553
>             Project: Hive
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Panagiotis Garefalakis
>            Assignee: Panagiotis Garefalakis
>            Priority: Major
>              Labels: pull-request-available
>          Time Spent: 5h 50m
>  Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
>  Apache Hive is currently on 1.5.X version and in order to take advantage of 
> the latest ORC improvements such as column encryption we have to bump to 
> 1.6.X.
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=12343288&styleName=&projectId=12318320&Create=Create&atl_token=A5KQ-2QAV-T4JA-FDED_4ae78f19321c7fb1e7f337fba1dd90af751d8810_lin
> Even though ORC reader could work out of the box, HIVE LLAP is heavily 
> depending on internal ORC APIs e.g., to retrieve and store File Footers, 
> Tails, streams – un/compress RG data etc. As there ware many internal changes 
> from 1.5 to 1.6 (Input stream offsets, relative BufferChunks etc.) the 
> upgrade is not straightforward.
> This Umbrella Jira tracks this upgrade effort.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)

Reply via email to