http://apache-carbondata-dev-mailing-list-archive.168.s1.nabble.com/Discuss-Set-block-size-for-table-on-table-level-tp1472p1492.html
> +1, To avoid potential compatibility issue, we could introduce this param
> as an optional field, as long as it is not a required field, we are fine
> with a defined default block size.
>
> Regards.
>
> Jihong
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jacky Li [mailto:
[hidden email]]
> Sent: Monday, September 26, 2016 7:29 AM
> To:
[hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [Discuss]Set block_size for table on table level
>
> I am OK with this feature, the only thing I am worrying about is the
> compatibility of CarbonData file reader. Can you make it compatible when
> you reading old CarbonData file without this property.
> We have encountered many times that user need to delete the store and
> re-load the data.
>
> Regards,
> Jacky
>
> > 在 2016年9月26日，下午2:15，Ravindra Pesala <
[hidden email]> 写道：
> >
> > +1
> > At same time max and min block size should be restricted and validated
> > while creating table.
> >
> > On 26 September 2016 at 07:36, Zhangshunyu <
[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Purpose:
> >> To configure block file size for each table on column level, so that
> each
> >> table could has its own blocksize.
> >> My solution:
> >> Add a new parameter in table properties, when create a table, the user
> can
> >> set it in ddl. Add a parameter in thrift format just like other
> properties,
> >> and write this info into thrift file so that this info would not lost
> when
> >> cluster is restarted.
> >>
> >> What's your opinion?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> View this message in context:
http://apache-carbondata-> >> mailing-list-archive.1130556.n5.nabble.com/Discuss-Set-
> >> block-size-for-table-on-table-level-tp1472.html
> >> Sent from the Apache CarbonData Mailing List archive mailing list
> archive
> >> at Nabble.com.
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Thanks & Regards,
> > Ravi
>
>
>
>