Skip to content
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

[CT-185] Remove use of temporary table for merge incremental strategy in Snowflake #92

Closed
jnatkins opened this issue Feb 8, 2022 · 3 comments · Fixed by #93
Closed
Labels
Stale type:enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@jnatkins
Copy link
Contributor

jnatkins commented Feb 8, 2022

Describe the feature

The MERGE command in Snowflake supports the use of arbitrary SELECT queries in the USING clause. If we were to adopt this approach for the merge incremental strategy, it remove a database write step that we are currently performing due to the creation of a temporary table to store the data to-be-merged.

Describe alternatives you've considered

The alternative is leaving the status quo. This would represent a performance improvement for the adapter when using the merge strategy.

Additional context

Please include any other relevant context here.

Who will this benefit?

Any customer who is working with incremental tables that have very large incremental loads stand to see a performance improvement with this.

Are you interested in contributing this feature?

Yes, to an extent. I can get some of the way, but would probably need assistance getting this to a merge-able state.

@jnatkins jnatkins added type:enhancement New feature or request triage:product labels Feb 8, 2022
@github-actions github-actions bot changed the title Remove use of temporary table for merge incremental strategy in Snowflake [CT-185] Remove use of temporary table for merge incremental strategy in Snowflake Feb 8, 2022
@jtcohen6
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks for opening the issue + PR @jnatkins! I'm about making this change for merge. Also linking a community slack thread about this from last month.

I don't think we can support this change for delete+insert, since the intermediate relation helps us ensure absolute consistency between delete + insert.

I'll take a look at the PR, and leave a few quick comments.

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

This issue has been marked as Stale because it has been open for 180 days with no activity. If you would like the issue to remain open, please remove the stale label or comment on the issue, or it will be closed in 7 days.

@jnatkins
Copy link
Contributor Author

@jtcohen6 Should this be reopened? It looked like there was movement on my PR, but not sure if that's still in flight.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Stale type:enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants