You're right. I was thinking there was a hive-ql jar, but there isn't. (Note that they aren't duplicated in the source tree, just packaged up in the jar.) I've created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-4229 to provide a jar of the ql classes without the upstream classes included.
Note that in the long stream, I think we need to simplify the jars, but that is a bigger issue. -- Owen On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Dave Winterbourne < dave.winterbou...@gmail.com> wrote: > We have a custom User Defined Function that extends UDF - I'll admit some > ignorance, as I inherited this code, but UDF is a class that comes from > hive-exec, so it doesn't seem true that hive-exec is not intended for > external usage. That having been said, my original question is why there > are classes from commons-lang that are simply duplicated in the code base. > This is bad form at best, but causes class collisions and thus duplicate > class warnings. > > On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 2:48 PM, Owen O'Malley <omal...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Hive-exec isn't meant for external usage. It is the bundled jar of Hive's > > runtime dependencies that are required for Hive's MapReduce tasks. It > > consists of : > > > > hive-common > > hive-ql > > hive-serde > > hive-shims > > thrift > > commons-lang > > json > > avro > > avro-mapred > > java-ewah > > javolution > > protobuf-java > > > > -- Owen > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Dave Winterbourne < > > dave.winterbou...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > I have been working on eliminating duplicate class warnings in my maven > > > build, and in the end discovered that there are two classes from apache > > > commons-lang that are bundled with hive-exec: > > > > > > jar tf hive-0.10.0-bin//lib/hive-exec-0.10.0.jar | grep > > > org/apache/commons/lang/ > > > org/apache/commons/lang/ > > > org/apache/commons/lang/StringUtils.class > > > org/apache/commons/lang/WordUtils.class > > > > > > Why are these classes bundled with hive as opposed to just using > > > commons-lang? If there truly is a need for custom functionality, why > not > > > put it in a different class to avoid this collision? > > > > > >
