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

Unify Delta Lake tests' container handling with Hive and Iceberg #11300

Closed
Tracked by #11296
findepi opened this issue Mar 3, 2022 · 2 comments · Fixed by #11915
Closed
Tracked by #11296

Unify Delta Lake tests' container handling with Hive and Iceberg #11300

findepi opened this issue Mar 3, 2022 · 2 comments · Fixed by #11915
Labels
maintenance Project maintenance task test

Comments

@findepi
Copy link
Member

findepi commented Mar 3, 2022

Remove Delta's DockerizedDataLake, DockerImages, DockerContainer, DockerizedMinioDataLake, MinioClient, MinioContainer etc.
and replace with HiveMinioDataLake

This is a follow-up to #10897

@findepi findepi added test maintenance Project maintenance task labels Mar 3, 2022
@findepi findepi mentioned this issue Mar 3, 2022
29 tasks
@findepi
Copy link
Member Author

findepi commented Mar 3, 2022

unless Delta's version is superior, then we should unify the other way around cc @aczajkowski @losipiuk

@mdesmet
Copy link
Contributor

mdesmet commented Apr 12, 2022

I started to look into this issue yesterday.

The MinioClient provides some additional features on top of the standard S3 api that may be interesting to keep in our toolbox. So maybe it's interesting to migrate it to the HiveMinioDataLake setup:

  • Uploading of files based on resources (similar to below missing HadoopHive feature)
  • Event notifications on when files are created or updated similar to AWS lambda (not currently used though)

The HadoopHive class misses some features related to directly copying resource files to hdfs. Can be externalized though.

Some features are interesting to add to BaseTestContainer for executing commands in a container and retrieving the result.

The setup of QueryRunners in the tests can potentially be simplified, still need to investigate a bit more in detail.

Is anyone actively working on this? if not I can take it.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
maintenance Project maintenance task test
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants