Closed sandeep217 closed 4 years ago
Just FYI, this is not easy in the current way lookups are handled. I'm not sure if @b-slim has considered this case for https://github.com/druid-io/druid/pull/2291 and other LookupExtractor
stuff
@sandeep217 i am currently working on this, will send a proposal soon!
We are evaluating Druid for our use-case and this is the one thing I believe we are lacking. @sandeep217 's example is very similar to our case since our mapping changes fairly regularly, so I would like to :+1: this feature.
@b-slim do you have the proposal ready? sirpkt's proposal looks like is for a different feature.
This issue has been marked as stale due to 280 days of inactivity. It will be closed in 4 weeks if no further activity occurs. If this issue is still relevant, please simply write any comment. Even if closed, you can still revive the issue at any time or discuss it on the dev@druid.apache.org list. Thank you for your contributions.
This issue has been closed due to lack of activity. If you think that is incorrect, or the issue requires additional review, you can revive the issue at any time.
Hi, Lookups currently support a 1x1 and Nx1 mapping. Often there's a need to do a lookup against 1xN mapping. A common example is a lookup that maps userid to user-groups where a user may belong to more than one user groups. Denormalizing at ETL may not be desirable if user to user-group mapping changes over time.