> cacheTable("rooms3");
>
> sql("SELECT * FROM rooms2 LEFT JOIN rooms3 ON rooms2.hotelId =
> rooms3.hotelId AND rooms2.toDate = rooms3.toDate").count();
>
>
> Are we doing something wrong here?
> Thanks!
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://apache-spark-user-list.1001560.n3.nabble.com/Performance-problems-on-SQL-JOIN-tp8001.html
> Sent from the Apache Spark User List mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
educe at joins.scala:219' take up the majority of the time.
Is this due to bad partitioning or caching? Or is there a problem with the
JOIN operator?
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-spark-user-list.1001560.n3.nabble.com/Performance-problems-on-SQL-JOIN-tp8001p8016.html
Sent f
).map(x => BookingInfo(x(0),
> x(1),
> > ... , x(9))); // 30k rows
> >
> > rooms2.registerAsTable("rooms2");
> > cacheTable("rooms2");
> > rooms3.registerAsTable("rooms3");
> > cacheTable("rooms3");
> >
> > s
ows
>
> rooms2.registerAsTable("rooms2");
> cacheTable("rooms2");
> rooms3.registerAsTable("rooms3");
> cacheTable("rooms3");
>
> sql("SELECT * FROM rooms2 LEFT JOIN rooms3 ON rooms2.hotelId =
> rooms3.hotelId AND rooms2.toDate = ro
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-spark-user-list.1001560.n3.nabble.com/Performance-problems-on-SQL-JOIN-tp8001.html
Sent from the Apache Spark User List mailing list archive at Nabble.com.