Jackie-Jiang commented on PR #8713: URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/pull/8713#issuecomment-1129335759
> it should be easy to parse the table name since it needs to be present in the FROM clause. I think the `<db>.<table>` convention is from the connector, and we don't have the database concept in Pinot. When getting it from the `FROM` clause, we want to match it with the tables available in pinot. If we support dot in the table name, it will make it slightly hard to parse the name. E.g. when getting `a.b.c.d.e`, we won't know which part is the table name. > are nested field selects a thing yet? We don't support it yet, but it is in our roadmap, so we should take them into consideration I think using dot in table name (or any field name) is in general bad practice because dot is already reserved for other purpose. @dongxiaoman I think we should just use `_` instead of `.` for multi-tenant purpose. To avoid name conflict, we can reject namespace with underlying `_` or perform a prefix check when adding a new namespace. Some reference about not using `.`: - https://dba.stackexchange.com/questions/1166/is-it-okay-to-put-dots-in-sql-server-database-names#:~:text=Complex%20SQL%20actions%20are%20processed,if%20the%20base%20is%20fine.&text=These%20errors%20may%20more%20often,of%20anything%20on%20sql%20server. - https://stackoverflow.com/questions/41948399/is-it-good-practice-to-use-dots-within-table-names-in-mysql -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscr...@pinot.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscr...@pinot.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: commits-h...@pinot.apache.org
