[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-45?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15875117#comment-15875117
]
Pat Ferrel commented on PIO-45:
-------------------------------
Yeah, sorry, it was a bad example but does follow the rules above. These rules
are built into PIO for aggregated queries so refer to actual behavior when in
doubt.
Also there seems to be a problem where one event in the test dataset that
should not be dropped is, I'm still tracking this down.
The timestamp on any de-duped event should be the most recent of the dups.
Otherwise 2 trims may drop an event that shouldn't be. I haven't verified the
correct behavior here but since we are close to a release I thought I'd bring
it up while I verify.
To the best of my knowledge the README.md of the Template describes how PIO
should or does work.
> SelfCleaningDatasource erases all data
> --------------------------------------
>
> Key: PIO-45
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-45
> Project: PredictionIO
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 0.10.0-incubating
> Reporter: Pat Ferrel
> Assignee: Alexander Merritt
> Priority: Blocker
> Fix For: 0.11.0
>
> Attachments: import_handmade_simple.py,
> sample-time-window-and-downsample-data.txt
>
>
> as integrated into the UR, in the integration-test, the SelfCleaningDataset
> erases all data. This feature works fine in the AML version of PIO.
> Although not tested one could assume that this would be true with any other
> Datasource in other templates.
> [~emergentorder] can you check to see if the PIO merge was done correctly.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
