Support '>', '<', '>=', '<=', '<>' in any operator#20830
Merged
alamb merged 5 commits intoapache:mainfrom Mar 20, 2026
Merged
Conversation
buraksenn
changed the title
adriangb
approved these changes
Mar 9, 2026
Contributor
adriangb
left a comment
adriangb
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This looks great. It's incredible it hasn't been done yet given how straightforward the implementation is!
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
This PR extends DataFusion’s SQL planning for x <op> ANY(array_expr) to support additional comparison operators beyond = (specifically >, <, >=, <=, <>) and adds sqllogictest coverage for the new behavior.
Changes:
- Update SQL-to-relational expression planning to translate
ANYcomparisons into expressions usingarray_min/array_max(andarray_hasfor equality). - Expand
array.sltto validateANYbehavior for>,<,>=,<=, and<>using inline array data.
Reviewed changes
Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.
| File | Description |
|---|---|
| datafusion/sql/src/expr/mod.rs | Adds planning support for additional ANY comparison operators by rewriting to array_min/array_max-based predicates. |
| datafusion/sqllogictest/test_files/array.slt | Replaces the prior “unsupported” expectation with new SLT cases validating the added ANY operator support. |
💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.
Contributor
|
@buraksenn copilot has some good feedback - could you take a look? |
Contributor
Author
Indeed, I did not think of NULL cases. Thanks @adriangb. I think last commit addresses these |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.
💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.
You can also share your feedback on Copilot code review. Take the survey.
Contributor
|
@buraksenn can you please address the comments from Copilot? |
Contributor
Author
Of course, I was planning to address these late today. I will have time around 6-7 hours later and will finalize this PR |
Contributor
|
Thank you @buraksenn |
Contributor
|
Thanks again @buraksenn and @adriangb |
haohuaijin
pushed a commit
to haohuaijin/arrow-datafusion
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 21, 2026
## Which issue does this PR close? - Closes apache#2548. ## Rationale for this change ANY operator only supports equality check ## What changes are included in this PR? Adds support for other expressions and add tests ## Are these changes tested? Added slt tests for this and they all pass ## Are there any user-facing changes? Yes user's can now use any operator with this new expressions
de-bgunter
pushed a commit
to de-bgunter/datafusion
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 24, 2026
## Which issue does this PR close? - Closes apache#2548. ## Rationale for this change ANY operator only supports equality check ## What changes are included in this PR? Adds support for other expressions and add tests ## Are these changes tested? Added slt tests for this and they all pass ## Are there any user-facing changes? Yes user's can now use any operator with this new expressions
github-merge-queue Bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 18, 2026
## Which issue does this PR close? - Closes #2547 ## Rationale for this change Related with #20830 all operator does not support operators above. ## What changes are included in this PR? Adds support for other expressions and add tests This is a question actually I've checked behaviors of Postgresql and Duckdb about null semantics and continued with the Postgresql behavior. However, I'm not sure if we want this so also put Duckdb outputs. It would be great to have feedback on this | Query | PostgreSQL | This PR | DuckDB | |---|---|---|---| | `5 = ALL(NULL::INT[])` | `NULL` | `NULL` | `true` | | `5 <> ALL(NULL::INT[])` | `NULL` | `NULL` | `true` | | `5 > ALL(NULL::INT[])` | `NULL` | `NULL` | `true` | | `5 < ALL(NULL::INT[])` | `NULL` | `NULL` | `true` | | `5 >= ALL(NULL::INT[])` | `NULL` | `NULL` | `true` | | `5 <= ALL(NULL::INT[])` | `NULL` | `NULL` | `true` | ## Are these changes tested? Added slt tests for this and they all pass ## Are there any user-facing changes? Yes user's can now use all operator with this new expressions --------- Co-authored-by: Jeffrey Vo <jeffrey.vo.australia@gmail.com>
Rich-T-kid
pushed a commit
to Rich-T-kid/datafusion
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 21, 2026
## Which issue does this PR close? - Closes apache#2547 ## Rationale for this change Related with apache#20830 all operator does not support operators above. ## What changes are included in this PR? Adds support for other expressions and add tests This is a question actually I've checked behaviors of Postgresql and Duckdb about null semantics and continued with the Postgresql behavior. However, I'm not sure if we want this so also put Duckdb outputs. It would be great to have feedback on this | Query | PostgreSQL | This PR | DuckDB | |---|---|---|---| | `5 = ALL(NULL::INT[])` | `NULL` | `NULL` | `true` | | `5 <> ALL(NULL::INT[])` | `NULL` | `NULL` | `true` | | `5 > ALL(NULL::INT[])` | `NULL` | `NULL` | `true` | | `5 < ALL(NULL::INT[])` | `NULL` | `NULL` | `true` | | `5 >= ALL(NULL::INT[])` | `NULL` | `NULL` | `true` | | `5 <= ALL(NULL::INT[])` | `NULL` | `NULL` | `true` | ## Are these changes tested? Added slt tests for this and they all pass ## Are there any user-facing changes? Yes user's can now use all operator with this new expressions --------- Co-authored-by: Jeffrey Vo <jeffrey.vo.australia@gmail.com>
This file contains hidden or 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
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.
Which issue does this PR close?
Rationale for this change
ANY operator only supports equality check
What changes are included in this PR?
Adds support for other expressions and add tests
Are these changes tested?
Added slt tests for this and they all pass
Are there any user-facing changes?
Yes user's can now use any operator with this new expressions