I think ³it should overwrite the entire table² makes more sense.
One can reasonably expect that
³insert overwrite table t partition (pk)
select 1 as val, key from src where key > 20;² should actually be
written as
³insert overwrite table t
select 1 as val, key from src where key > 20;²
and
I expect the following because it follows per-ptn if-write-then-overwrite
semantics:
0,10
1,25
1,50
There can be a case to be made that it should overwrite the entire table,
and that would make sense too(probably more sense than this one), but not
one I'd think we should switch behavior to(backwa
It seems right to me that an existing partition should be overwritten if
that partition gets any data while older, untouched partition should stay.
After all, we are overwriting certain partitions, not the whole table.
--Xuefu
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 6:10 PM, Sergey Shelukhin
wrote:
> What do y
What do you think this SHOULD do?
> select key from src;
10
25
50
> create table t(val int) partitioned by (pk int);
> insert overwrite table t partition (pk)
select 0 as val, key from src where key < 30;
> insert overwrite table t partition (pk)
select 1 as val, key from src where key > 20;
