fix(core): row type should output the window function aggregation results #286
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
vbarua
reviewed
Aug 16, 2024
| @@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ protected Type.Struct deriveRecordType() { | |||
| .struct( | |||
| Stream.concat( | |||
| initial.fields().stream(), | |||
| getPartitionExpressions().stream().map(Expression::getType))); | |||
| getWindowFunctions().stream().map(WindowRelFunctionInvocation::outputType))); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is consistent with the language in the spec
Same as Project operator (input followed by each window expression).
vbarua
approved these changes
Aug 16, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
We've caught a problem where the
deriveRecordTypewas very inconsistent with Calcite'sRowType, and debugging those closely, Substrait was inconsistently adding the partition expression as part of the record type, which doesn't make sense (I mean in general, there might be cases that you are outputting the partition field).I've fixed the
deriveRecordTypemethod to output based on thewindowFunctionsinstead, and added a test that validates whether the types are still the expected after the round-trip, for the original case and added one new plan that had 2 distinct aggregations.