phoenix-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Schulte <gschu...@marinsoftware.com>
Subject Re: high cardinality aggregation query performance
Date Sat, 28 Feb 2015 02:37:13 GMT
509 guideposts according to system.stats, getting the table via runtime
seems to work, guide posts, here: http://goo.gl/jvcFec


As an aside, I am having issues getting a connection to phoenix/hbase
remotely (so I can debug from my IDE).  I have all the ports open that I
think would play a part - am I missing anything?
2181,49255,60000,60010,60020,60030,8080,8085,9090,
and 9095.  Connections from remote just hang and I never get an error or a
stack trace.

Thx

-Gary


On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 5:53 PM, James Taylor <jamestaylor@apache.org>
wrote:

> Try this code snippet to see if we can force the stats to be send over:
>
> conn.unwrap(PhoenixConnection.class).getQueryServices().clearCache();
> PTable table = PhoenixRuntime.getTable(conn, "PERF.BIG_OLAP_DOC");
> for (GuidePostsInfo info : table.getTableStats().getGuidePosts().values())
> {
>     for (byte[] gp : info.getGuidePosts()) {
>         System.out.println(Bytes.toStringBinary(gp));
>     }
> }
>
> Also, try this query and let me know what it says:
>     SELECT sum(GUIDE_POSTS_COUNT)
>     FROM SYSTEM.STATS
>     WHERE PHYSICAL_NAME = "PERF.BIG_OLAP_DOC";
>
> The UPDATE STATISTICS command timing out on the client prevented the
> client-side to pull over the new stats until it was complete on the
> server-side (that's why you only saw it later).
>
> Thanks,
> James
>
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 5:42 PM, Gary Schulte
> <gschulte@marinsoftware.com> wrote:
> > It appears I spoke too soon.  Presumably once the stats completed
> updating,
> > I now get the same exception:
> >
> > java.lang.IndexOutOfBoundsException: end index (174) must not be less
> than
> > start index (226)
> > at
> >
> com.google.common.base.Preconditions.checkPositionIndexes(Preconditions.java:388)
> > at
> com.google.common.collect.ImmutableList.subList(ImmutableList.java:362)
> > at com.google.common.collect.ImmutableList.subList(ImmutableList.java:62)
> > at
> >
> org.apache.phoenix.filter.SkipScanFilter.intersect(SkipScanFilter.java:291)
> > at
> >
> org.apache.phoenix.filter.SkipScanFilter.intersect(SkipScanFilter.java:177)
> > at
> org.apache.phoenix.compile.ScanRanges.intersectScan(ScanRanges.java:316)
> > at
> >
> org.apache.phoenix.iterate.BaseResultIterators.getParallelScans(BaseResultIterators.java:464)
> > at
> >
> org.apache.phoenix.iterate.BaseResultIterators.getParallelScans(BaseResultIterators.java:394)
> > at
> >
> org.apache.phoenix.iterate.BaseResultIterators.<init>(BaseResultIterators.java:184)
> > at
> >
> org.apache.phoenix.iterate.ParallelIterators.<init>(ParallelIterators.java:54)
> > at
> >
> org.apache.phoenix.execute.AggregatePlan.newIterator(AggregatePlan.java:173)
> > at
> org.apache.phoenix.execute.BaseQueryPlan.iterator(BaseQueryPlan.java:227)
> > at
> org.apache.phoenix.execute.BaseQueryPlan.iterator(BaseQueryPlan.java:154)
> > at
> >
> org.apache.phoenix.jdbc.PhoenixStatement$1.call(PhoenixStatement.java:226)
> > at
> >
> org.apache.phoenix.jdbc.PhoenixStatement$1.call(PhoenixStatement.java:217)
> > at org.apache.phoenix.call.CallRunner.run(CallRunner.java:53)
> > at
> >
> org.apache.phoenix.jdbc.PhoenixStatement.executeQuery(PhoenixStatement.java:216)
> > at
> >
> org.apache.phoenix.jdbc.PhoenixStatement.execute(PhoenixStatement.java:1057)
> > at sqlline.SqlLine$Commands.execute(SqlLine.java:3673)
> > at sqlline.SqlLine$Commands.sql(SqlLine.java:3584)
> > at sqlline.SqlLine.dispatch(SqlLine.java:821)
> > at sqlline.SqlLine.begin(SqlLine.java:699)
> > at sqlline.SqlLine.mainWithInputRedirection(SqlLine.java:441)
> > at sqlline.SqlLine.main(SqlLine.java:424)
> >
> >
> > Still null for the guideposts though, both with PName.EMPTY_NAME and null
> > for the PTableKey constructor.
> >
> > It certainly appears to be stats related.
> >
> > -Gary
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 4:06 PM, Gary Schulte <
> gschulte@marinsoftware.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> I have the query timeout set too low, but I believe the stats update
> >> completed as I see related rows in the stats table.
> >>
> >> Both skip and in-list queries run fine - no exceptions.  Still null for
> >> the guideposts though - is it likely this is due to the timeout in the
> stats
> >> update?
> >>
> >> -Gary
> >>
> >> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 12:30 PM, James Taylor <jamestaylor@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> See inline. Thanks for your help on this one, Gary. It'd be good to
> >>> get to the bottom of it so it doesn't bite you again.
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Gary Schulte
> >>> <gschulte@marinsoftware.com> wrote:
> >>> > James,
> >>> >
> >>> > When I simply added the skip scan hint, I got the same exception
> (even
> >>> > with
> >>> > device_type criteria removed) but the indexes in the exception
> changed.
> >>> > Interesting - I wouldn't have expected adding a skip scan hint would
> >>> > have
> >>> > altered the plan, since it was already doing a skip scan.
> >>>
> >>> The hint tells Phoenix to keep using PK columns in the skip scan,
> >>> rather than stopping at the first PK column that isn't being filtered
> >>> on. We don't do this by default, because if the cardinality was very
> >>> high, we wouldn't want to do this. Since our stats don't yet capture
> >>> cardinality, we can't yet automatically do this.
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > 1: current region boundaries, linked so as not to clutter the list
> with
> >>> > hex
> >>> > :  http://goo.gl/hFSzYJ
> >>> >
> >>> > 2: table stats/guideposts, it looks like there are/were none.  The
> >>> > output
> >>> > from the guidepost loop was :
> >>> >
> >>> > null
> >>> >
> >>> > (this was prior to deleting from system.stats)
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > 3: deleting system.stats appears to have resolved the exception for
> >>> > both the
> >>> > explicit varchar inlist and the skip_scan hint.  Skip scanning the
> >>> > reduced
> >>> > index space yields much faster results, ~5 seconds as opposed to 27.
> >>>
> >>> Glad to hear it's faster with the hint forcing the skip scan across
> >>> all your columns.
> >>>
> >>> I can't explain why deleting the stats resolved the issue, though, as
> >>> I would have expected (2) to have returned the stats. FYI, it looks
> >>> like the bug is in the code that intersects the guideposts with the
> >>> region boundaries.
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > Should I expect to rebuild stats often or is this more of an error
> >>> > case?
> >>>
> >>> Stats are rebuilt automatically when a major compaction occurs and are
> >>> updated as splits happen. They can also be manually updated by running
> >>> the following command:
> >>>
> >>> UPDATE STATISTICS PERF.BIG_OLAP_DOC
> >>>
> >>> For more info on stats, see
> >>> http://phoenix.apache.org/update_statistics.html
> >>>
> >>> If you run this command, does the problem start to reoccur? If so,
> >>> would you mind adding this command before running the loop to collect
> >>> the guideposts and let me know if you see that stats output?
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > Thanks again.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 5:55 PM, James Taylor <
> jamestaylor@apache.org>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Gary,
> >>> >> I'm not able to repro the issue - I filed PHOENIX-1690 to track
it
> and
> >>> >> attached my test case there. It looks related to the particular
> state
> >>> >> the table is in wrt its region boundaries and current statistics,
so
> >>> >> I'll need the following additional information to try to help me
> repro
> >>> >> this:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> 1) What are the current region boundaries of your table? You can
get
> >>> >> this programmatically through code like this:
> >>> >>
> >>> >>         Connection conn = DriverManager.getConnection(getUrl(),
> >>> >> props);
> >>> >>         List<HRegionLocation> splits =
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> conn.unwrap(PhoenixConnection.class).getQueryServices().getAllTableRegions(Bytes.toBytes("PERF.BIG_OLAP_DOC"));
> >>> >>         for (HRegionLocation split : splits) {
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> System.out.println(Bytes.toStringBinary(split.getRegionInfo().getEndKey()));
> >>> >>         }
> >>> >>
> >>> >> 2) What are the current stats for the table. You can get this by
> >>> >> programmatically through code like this:
> >>> >>
> >>> >>         PTable table =
> >>> >> conn.unwrap(PhoenixConnection.class).getMetaDataCache().getTable(new
> >>> >> PTableKey(null, "PERF.BIG_OLAP_DOC"));
> >>> >>         for (GuidePostsInfo info :
> >>> >> table.getTableStats().getGuidePosts().values()) {
> >>> >>             for (byte[] gp : info.getGuidePosts()) {
> >>> >>                 System.out.println(Bytes.toStringBinary(gp));
> >>> >>             }
> >>> >>         }
> >>> >>
> >>> >> 3) If you can try after removing all rows from the SYSTEM.STATS
> table
> >>> >> and let me know if the problem still occurs, that'd be helpful
too.
> >>> >> You can just do the following from sqlline: DELETE FROM SYSTEM.STATS
> >>> >> and then exit sqlline, start it again, and rerun the original query.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Thanks,
> >>> >> James
> >>> >>
> >>> >> On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 10:52 AM, James Taylor
> >>> >> <jamestaylor@apache.org>
> >>> >> wrote:
> >>> >> > Gary,
> >>> >> > One possible workaround. Can you try adding the SKIP_SCAN
hint to
> >>> >> > your
> >>> >> > query (instead of the AND device_type in
> >>> >> > ('MOBILE','DESKTOP','OTHER','TABLET')), like this?
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > SELECT /*+ SKIP_SCAN */ count(1) cnt,
> >>> >> > ...
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > Thanks,
> >>> >> > James
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 10:16 AM, James Taylor
> >>> >> > <jamestaylor@apache.org>
> >>> >> > wrote:
> >>> >> >> Sounds like a bug. I'll try to repro on my end. Thanks
for the
> >>> >> >> details,
> >>> >> >> Gary.
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >>     James
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 1:49 PM, Gary Schulte
> >>> >> >> <gschulte@marinsoftware.com> wrote:
> >>> >> >>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 12:29 AM, James Taylor
> >>> >> >>> <jamestaylor@apache.org>
> >>> >> >>> wrote:
> >>> >> >>>>
> >>> >> >>>> Based on your query plan, the skip scan is being
done solely
> >>> >> >>>> based on
> >>> >> >>>> your
> >>> >> >>>> salt bucket while the rest of the filtering is
being done by a
> >>> >> >>>> filter, which
> >>> >> >>>> means that you're not filtering based on the leading
part of
> your
> >>> >> >>>> primary
> >>> >> >>>> key. We'll know more once you post your schema,
but if NETWORK,
> >>> >> >>>> KEYWORD_ID
> >>> >> >>>> and CUSTOMER_ID formed your primary key constraint,
then the
> skip
> >>> >> >>>> scan would
> >>> >> >>>> work well.
> >>> >> >>>>
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>> Thanks for your response James.  Sorry for the slow
reply - I
> had
> >>> >> >>> difficulty
> >>> >> >>> finding the exact set of test queries I was using
for timings.
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>> The relevant portion of the olap doc schema is:
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>> create table PERF.BIG_OLAP_DOC (
> >>> >> >>> client_id                           integer not null
> >>> >> >>> ,customer_id                        integer
> >>> >> >>> ,time_id                            integer not null
> >>> >> >>> ,conversion_type_id                 integer not null
> >>> >> >>> ,device_type                        varchar(16)
> >>> >> >>> ,keyword_id                         bigint not null
> >>> >> >>> ,creative_id                        bigint not null
> >>> >> >>> ,placement_id                       bigint not null
> >>> >> >>> ,product_target_id                  bigint not null
> >>> >> >>> ,network                            varchar(7)
> >>> >> >>> ,impressions                        decimal(18, 4)
> >>> >> >>> ,publisher_clicks                   decimal(18, 4)
> >>> >> >>> ,publisher_cost                     decimal(18, 4)
> >>> >> >>> ,conversions                        decimal(18, 4)
> >>> >> >>> ,revenue                            decimal(18, 4)
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>> [ ...additional metric and dimensional colums ...
]
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>     constraint perf_fact_pk primary key (client_id,
time_id,
> >>> >> >>> conversion_type_id, device_type, keyword_id, creative_id,
> >>> >> >>> placement_id,
> >>> >> >>> product_target_id))SALT_BUCKETS=10;
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>> I am evaluating a 'stitch' case where results from
an external
> >>> >> >>> system
> >>> >> >>> are
> >>> >> >>> injected either via table or (as in this case) an
in-list.  An
> >>> >> >>> example
> >>> >> >>> of
> >>> >> >>> one of these test agg queries I am using is:
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>> SELECT count(1) cnt,
> >>> >> >>>        coalesce(SUM(impressions), 0.0) AS "impressions",
> >>> >> >>>        coalesce(SUM(publisher_clicks), 0.0) AS "pub_clicks",
> >>> >> >>>        coalesce(SUM(publisher_cost), 0.0) AS "pub_cost",
> >>> >> >>>        coalesce(SUM(conversions), 0.0) AS "conversions",
> >>> >> >>>        coalesce(SUM(revenue), 0.0) AS "revenue"
> >>> >> >>>   FROM perf.big_olap_doc
> >>> >> >>>  WHERE time_id between 3000 and 3700
> >>> >> >>>    AND network in ('SEARCH')
> >>> >> >>>    AND conversion_type_id = 1
> >>> >> >>>    AND client_id = 10724
> >>> >> >>> --   AND device_type in ('MOBILE','DESKTOP','OTHER','TABLET')
> >>> >> >>>    AND keyword_id in (
> >>> >> >>> 613214369, 613217307, 613247509, 613248897, 613250382,
> 613250387,
> >>> >> >>> 613252322,
> >>> >> >>> 613260252, 613261753, 613261754, 613261759,
> >>> >> >>> 613261770, 613261873, 613261884, 613261885, 613261888,
> 613261889,
> >>> >> >>> 613261892,
> >>> >> >>> 613261897, 613261913, 613261919, 613261927,
> >>> >> >>> 614496021, 843606367, 843606967, 843607021, 843607033,
> 843607089,
> >>> >> >>> 1038731600, 1038731672, 1038731673, 1038731675,
> >>> >> >>> 1038731684, 1038731693, 1046990487, 1046990488, 1046990499,
> >>> >> >>> 1046990505,
> >>> >> >>> 1046990506, 1049724722, 1051109548, 1051311275,
> >>> >> >>> 1051311904, 1060574377, 1060574395, 1060574506, 1060574562,
> >>> >> >>> 1115915938,
> >>> >> >>> 1115915939, 1115915941, 1116310571, 1367495544,
> >>> >> >>> 1367495545, 1367497297, 1367497298, 1367497299, 1367497300,
> >>> >> >>> 1367497303,
> >>> >> >>> 1367497313, 1367497813, 1367497816, 1367497818,
> >>> >> >>> 1367497821, 1367497822, 1367497823, 1624976423, 1624976451,
> >>> >> >>> 1624976457,
> >>> >> >>> 3275636061, 3275640505, 3275645765, 3275645807,
> >>> >> >>> 3275649138, 3275651456, 3275651460, 3275651478, 3275651479,
> >>> >> >>> 3275654566,
> >>> >> >>> 3275654568, 3275654570, 3275654575, 3275659612,
> >>> >> >>> 3275659616, 3275659620, 3275668880, 3275669693, 3275675627,
> >>> >> >>> 3275675634,
> >>> >> >>> 3275677479, 3275677504, 3275678855, 3275679524,
> >>> >> >>> 3275679532, 3275680014, 3275682307, 3275682308, 3275682309,
> >>> >> >>> 3275682310,
> >>> >> >>> 3275682420, 3275682423, 3275682436, 3275682448,
> >>> >> >>> 3275682460, 3275682462, 3275682474, 3275684831, 3275688903,
> >>> >> >>> 3275694023,
> >>> >> >>> 3275694025, 3275694027, 3275695054, 3275695056,
> >>> >> >>> 3275695062, 3275699512, 3275699514, 3275699518, 3275701682,
> >>> >> >>> 3275701683,
> >>> >> >>> 3275701685, 3275701688, 3275703633, 3275703634,
> >>> >> >>> 3275703635, 3275703636, 3275703638, 3275703639, 3275704860,
> >>> >> >>> 3275704861,
> >>> >> >>> 3275764577, 3275797149, 3275798566, 3275798567,
> >>> >> >>> 3275798568, 3275798592, 3275931147, 3275942728, 3275945337,
> >>> >> >>> 3275945338,
> >>> >> >>> 3275945339, 3275945340, 3275945342, 3275945344,
> >>> >> >>> 3275946319, 3275946322, 3275946324, 3275946643, 3275949495,
> >>> >> >>> 3275949498,
> >>> >> >>> 3275949500, 3275950250, 3275955128, 3275955129,
> >>> >> >>> 3275955130, 3427017435, 3427017450, 3438304254, 3438304257,
> >>> >> >>> 3447068169,
> >>> >> >>> 3505227849, 3505227890, 3505556908, 3506351285,
> >>> >> >>> 3506351389, 3506351398, 3506351468, 3510037138, 3510038610,
> >>> >> >>> 3545590644,
> >>> >> >>> 3545594378, 3545595073, 3545595318, 3545595506,
> >>> >> >>> 3545597841, 3545598818, 3545599658, 3545599663, 3545601215,
> >>> >> >>> 3556080898,
> >>> >> >>> 3556080980, 3556080999, 3556081323, 3565122663,
> >>> >> >>> 3565122679, 3565122801, 3565122858, 3565122908, 3565122929,
> >>> >> >>> 3565122952,
> >>> >> >>> 3565122984, 3565123028, 3565123047, 3565123048,
> >>> >> >>> 3565123203, 3565123230, 3949988054, 3949988056, 3949988070,
> >>> >> >>> 3972992248,
> >>> >> >>> 3972992252, 3972992254, 3972992257, 3972992263,
> >>> >> >>> 3972992267, 3972992268, 3972992269, 3972992270, 3972992274,
> >>> >> >>> 3972992275,
> >>> >> >>> 3972992277, 3972992281, 3972992293, 3972992298,
> >>> >> >>> 3972992299, 3972992305, 3972992307, 3972992313, 3972992316,
> >>> >> >>> 3972992322,
> >>> >> >>> 3972992338, 3978471261, 3978471272, 4266318185,
> >>> >> >>> 4298107404, 4308853119, 4308853123, 4308853500, 4451174646,
> >>> >> >>> 4451174656,
> >>> >> >>> 4451174701, 4569827278, 4569827284, 4569827287,
> >>> >> >>> 4569827379, 4569827523, 4569827524, 4896589676, 4979049725,
> >>> >> >>> 5054587609,
> >>> >> >>> 5136433884, 5362640372, 5393109964, 5393405364,
> >>> >> >>> 5393405365, 5393405620, 5393405625, 5393405675, 5393405677,
> >>> >> >>> 5393405858,
> >>> >> >>> 5393405970)
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>> Reading your interpretation of the skip scan, I see
that the
> plan
> >>> >> >>> is
> >>> >> >>> indicating it is only using the salt and the first
three columns
> >>> >> >>> of
> >>> >> >>> the
> >>> >> >>> index, client_id, and time_id and conversion_type.
 I hadn't
> >>> >> >>> considered the
> >>> >> >>> salt - that bit of detail in the plan makes more sense
to me
> now.
> >>> >> >>> It
> >>> >> >>> looks
> >>> >> >>> now like the lackluster performance for higher cardinality
> >>> >> >>> aggregations is
> >>> >> >>> related to scanning a much larger portion of the key
space.  For
> >>> >> >>> aggregations where I am not relying on filtering,
I am seeing
> much
> >>> >> >>> better
> >>> >> >>> performance.
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>> So to tune this particular stitch case / skip scan,
it looks
> like
> >>> >> >>> I
> >>> >> >>> need to
> >>> >> >>> get the 4th index column into the criteria.  There
are only four
> >>> >> >>> distinct
> >>> >> >>> values in the fourth index column (these can/should
probably be
> >>> >> >>> something
> >>> >> >>> other than varchar, but this is what I have loaded
currently).
> In
> >>> >> >>> order to
> >>> >> >>> use the keyword_id portion of the index I tried explicitly
> >>> >> >>> specifying
> >>> >> >>> all
> >>> >> >>> device_types via in-list (the commented portion of
the query
> >>> >> >>> above),
> >>> >> >>> but I
> >>> >> >>> get a peculiar error:
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>> java.lang.IndexOutOfBoundsException: end index (1)
must not be
> >>> >> >>> less
> >>> >> >>> than
> >>> >> >>> start index (2)
> >>> >> >>> at
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> com.google.common.base.Preconditions.checkPositionIndexes(Preconditions.java:388)
> >>> >> >>> at
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> com.google.common.collect.ImmutableList.subList(ImmutableList.java:362)
> >>> >> >>> at
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> com.google.common.collect.ImmutableList.subList(ImmutableList.java:62)
> >>> >> >>> at
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> org.apache.phoenix.filter.SkipScanFilter.intersect(SkipScanFilter.java:291)
> >>> >> >>> at
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> org.apache.phoenix.filter.SkipScanFilter.intersect(SkipScanFilter.java:177)
> >>> >> >>> at
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> org.apache.phoenix.compile.ScanRanges.intersectScan(ScanRanges.java:316)
> >>> >> >>> at
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> org.apache.phoenix.iterate.BaseResultIterators.getParallelScans(BaseResultIterators.java:464)
> >>> >> >>> at
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> org.apache.phoenix.iterate.BaseResultIterators.getParallelScans(BaseResultIterators.java:394)
> >>> >> >>> at
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> org.apache.phoenix.iterate.BaseResultIterators.<init>(BaseResultIterators.java:184)
> >>> >> >>> at
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> org.apache.phoenix.iterate.ParallelIterators.<init>(ParallelIterators.java:54)
> >>> >> >>> at
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> org.apache.phoenix.execute.AggregatePlan.newIterator(AggregatePlan.java:173)
> >>> >> >>> at
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> org.apache.phoenix.execute.BaseQueryPlan.iterator(BaseQueryPlan.java:227)
> >>> >> >>> at
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> org.apache.phoenix.execute.BaseQueryPlan.iterator(BaseQueryPlan.java:154)
> >>> >> >>> at
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> org.apache.phoenix.jdbc.PhoenixStatement$1.call(PhoenixStatement.java:226)
> >>> >> >>> at
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> org.apache.phoenix.jdbc.PhoenixStatement$1.call(PhoenixStatement.java:217)
> >>> >> >>> at org.apache.phoenix.call.CallRunner.run(CallRunner.java:53)
> >>> >> >>> at
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> org.apache.phoenix.jdbc.PhoenixStatement.executeQuery(PhoenixStatement.java:216)
> >>> >> >>> at
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> org.apache.phoenix.jdbc.PhoenixStatement.execute(PhoenixStatement.java:1057)
> >>> >> >>> at sqlline.SqlLine$Commands.execute(SqlLine.java:3673)
> >>> >> >>> at sqlline.SqlLine$Commands.sql(SqlLine.java:3584)
> >>> >> >>> at sqlline.SqlLine.dispatch(SqlLine.java:821)
> >>> >> >>> at sqlline.SqlLine.begin(SqlLine.java:699)
> >>> >> >>> at sqlline.SqlLine.mainWithInputRedirection(SqlLine.java:441)
> >>> >> >>> at sqlline.SqlLine.main(SqlLine.java:424)
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>> I thought perhaps I was hitting an upper limit on
the number of
> >>> >> >>> elements in
> >>> >> >>> an in-list for a skip scan, and so tried removing
the 250
> element
> >>> >> >>> keyword
> >>> >> >>> in-list entirely and leaving only the device_type
in-list, but I
> >>> >> >>> still
> >>> >> >>> get
> >>> >> >>> the same error.  It happens immediately, even for
an explain,
> so I
> >>> >> >>> presume
> >>> >> >>> this is a query parsing problem.  Is there a bug or
limitation
> of
> >>> >> >>> skip
> >>> >> >>> scans
> >>> >> >>> and/or sub lists involving varchar?
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>> Thx
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>
> >>
> >
>

Mime
View raw message