[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-4458?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14380787#comment-14380787 ]
Rohini Palaniswamy edited comment on PIG-4458 at 3/25/15 9:13 PM: ------------------------------------------------------------------ ant test should have failed. i.e what failed for me. piggybank is built after pig and is not a dependency for pig. So installed in maven does not matter. was (Author: rohini): ant test should have failed. i.e what failed for me. piggybank is built after pig and is not a dependency for pig. Even if it was maven instead of ant, it would be the same. > Support UDFs in a FOREACH Before a Merge Join > --------------------------------------------- > > Key: PIG-4458 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-4458 > Project: Pig > Issue Type: New Feature > Reporter: William Watson > Assignee: William Watson > Fix For: 0.15.0 > > Attachments: PIG-4458-FixTestFailure.patch, > PIG-4458.04.remove-merge-join-udf-restriction.patch, > PIG-4458.05.remove-merge-join-udf-restriction.patch > > > Right now, the MapSideMergeValidator outright rejects any foreach that has a > UDF in it: > {code} > private boolean isAcceptableForEachOp(Operator lo) throws > LogicalToPhysicalTranslatorException { > if (lo instanceof LOForEach) { > OperatorPlan innerPlan = ((LOForEach) lo).getInnerPlan(); > validateMapSideMerge(innerPlan.getSinks(), innerPlan); > return !containsUDFs((LOForEach) lo); > } else { > return false; > } > } > {code} > There is a TODO for this later on in that same class (inside containsUDFs): > {code} > // TODO (dvryaboy): in the future we could relax this rule by tracing what > fields > // are being passed into the UDF, and only refusing if the UDF is working on > the > // join key. Transforms of other fields should be ok. > {code} > We should do the TODO and relax this requirement or just remove it altogether -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)