Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
skip presto view parsing #211
skip presto view parsing #211
Changes from 2 commits
0deda8d
8cec0a9
a0574be
8eb2a05
59e3461
a765d92
35d47cf
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The function name
hasMarker
isn't super descriptive. Can we change it to something likehasIncompatibleViewMarker
, orhasPrestoViewMarker
, orhasNonHiveViewMarker
, or something like that?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
sure I like
hasNonHiveViewMarker
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't understand what's going on here - why is the db name the same in this case?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't know if it is that's true that's why I'm checking:
if our transform didn't change the database name we don't need to try and do the parsing just return the table as is (nothing would have changed).
This creeped in when we removed the IdentityMapping (which was just returning table for non prefixed metastores). So the if will mimic that behaviour again.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
is it worth keeping the code on line 123 since that will throw an error still?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
the original can't have the same string as the extended cause it also needs the colon. if we add it will it still throw an error?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I return the table in this if so we'll not even try to parse.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yes, but if the database name is different it will still throw an error
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
No because I skip parsing in the parser class for Presto markers. The if in here is to ensure other crazy markers don't also through errors. The code here is to basically get back to same support as in pre WD 3.6.0. WD 3.7.0 introduced the problems.
If we really have to support Presto I got this follow up: #212
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
OK, thanks for creating that issue. So for now we'll return the Presto view "as is" but that could mean it won't actually work since it doesn't have the correct prefixes and that's what #212 is all about.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
correct this is fixing and reverting old behaviour. Make it work again if there are no prefixes to remove.