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

[Feature] Unified catalog support Kudu #45591

Open
2 tasks done
predator4ann opened this issue May 14, 2024 · 6 comments · Fixed by #45590
Open
2 tasks done

[Feature] Unified catalog support Kudu #45591

predator4ann opened this issue May 14, 2024 · 6 comments · Fixed by #45590

Comments

@predator4ann
Copy link
Contributor

predator4ann commented May 14, 2024

Feature request

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Generally speaking, kudu's metadata is also stored in hms, like hive, iceberg, and hudi. Therefore, unified catalog could also support kudu's data reading to simplify user usage costs.

Describe the solution you'd like
#45590

Describe alternatives you've considered
Nope.

Additional context
Nope.

@kevincai kevincai changed the title [Feature] Uniifed catalog support Kudu [Feature] Unified catalog support Kudu May 15, 2024
@wangsimo0
Copy link
Contributor

Hi, may I ask the scenario?
Unified connector is more like a middle stage in migrating from hive to iceberg/hudi.., cause iceberg/hudi are common upgrade methods for hive, users don't need to care about which catalog they are using. or in some companies, for example, there are both iceberg and hudi, although this is not common to see, they can use a unified connector to unify user experience.
but for Kudu I think is a different scenario

@predator4ann
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi, may I ask the scenario? Unified connector is more like a middle stage in migrating from hive to iceberg/hudi.., cause iceberg/hudi are common upgrade methods for hive, users don't need to care about which catalog they are using. or in some companies, for example, there are both iceberg and hudi, although this is not common to see, they can use a unified connector to unify user experience. but for Kudu I think is a different scenario

Of course, in our scenario, the metadata of hive/iceberg/kudu is stored in hms. When users use Trino, they don't need to worry about what type of table they are accessing, they can use hive uniformly for access. The engine can automatically route to the correct catalog, just like the purpose of unified catalog. Therefore, I believe that as long as the storage of metadata is the same, it can be accessed through a catalog, which can greatly simplify user usage.

@wangsimo0
Copy link
Contributor

Hi, may I ask the scenario? Unified connector is more like a middle stage in migrating from hive to iceberg/hudi.., cause iceberg/hudi are common upgrade methods for hive, users don't need to care about which catalog they are using. or in some companies, for example, there are both iceberg and hudi, although this is not common to see, they can use a unified connector to unify user experience. but for Kudu I think is a different scenario

Of course, in our scenario, the metadata of hive/iceberg/kudu is stored in hms. When users use Trino, they don't need to worry about what type of table they are accessing, they can use hive uniformly for access. The engine can automatically route to the correct catalog, just like the purpose of unified catalog. Therefore, I believe that as long as the storage of metadata is the same, it can be accessed through a catalog, which can greatly simplify user usage.

you mean the table redirection feature in trino? that also works between hive connector and kudu connector when it comes to hms?

@predator4ann
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi, may I ask the scenario? Unified connector is more like a middle stage in migrating from hive to iceberg/hudi.., cause iceberg/hudi are common upgrade methods for hive, users don't need to care about which catalog they are using. or in some companies, for example, there are both iceberg and hudi, although this is not common to see, they can use a unified connector to unify user experience. but for Kudu I think is a different scenario

Of course, in our scenario, the metadata of hive/iceberg/kudu is stored in hms. When users use Trino, they don't need to worry about what type of table they are accessing, they can use hive uniformly for access. The engine can automatically route to the correct catalog, just like the purpose of unified catalog. Therefore, I believe that as long as the storage of metadata is the same, it can be accessed through a catalog, which can greatly simplify user usage.

you mean the table redirection feature in trino? that also works between hive connector and kudu connector when it comes to hms?

Yes, the community supports the redirect of hive to iceberg, and we have extended the redirect of hive to kudu ourselves

@miomiocat
Copy link
Contributor

@mergify backport branch-3.3

1 similar comment
@miomiocat
Copy link
Contributor

@mergify backport branch-3.3

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants