Skip to content

Conversation

@jiangzhx
Copy link
Contributor

Which issue does this PR close?

Closes #6668.

Rationale for this change

What changes are included in this PR?

Are these changes tested?

Are there any user-facing changes?

@github-actions github-actions bot added core Core DataFusion crate sqllogictest SQL Logic Tests (.slt) labels Jun 15, 2023
@jackwener
Copy link
Member

CI failed relate with #6676

// "| 44 | |",
// "+-------+--------+",
// ];
// assert_batches_eq!(expected, &results);
Copy link
Contributor Author

@jiangzhx jiangzhx Jun 15, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why was this test case commented out even though it's working correctly?
@mingmwang, if you have time, could you please help me understand,i'm working on move rs to sqllogicatest

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I remember this was because the infer nullablity has bug causing the physical plan schema check failed.
I will take a closer look tomorrow, maybe it was already fixed recently.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Got it, it should have been fixed. I uncommented the code and everything is working fine.

@jiangzhx jiangzhx marked this pull request as ready for review June 15, 2023 15:13
@jackwener jackwener requested review from alamb and jackwener June 16, 2023 12:21
@mingmwang
Copy link
Contributor

@jiangzhx
In the original UTs, there are some comments to explain why the plan is like this,
For example:

exists_subquery_with_limit, in_correlated_subquery_with_limit

In some cases the limit is removed and the subquery is de-correlated, in some cases it is not.

Could you please add the comments back to the slt file ?

@jiangzhx
Copy link
Contributor Author

@jiangzhx In the original UTs, there are some comments to explain why the plan is like this, For example:

exists_subquery_with_limit, in_correlated_subquery_with_limit

In some cases the limit is removed and the subquery is de-correlated, in some cases it is not.

Could you please add the comments back to the slt file ?

No problem, I will check it tonight and rebase the commit.

@jiangzhx
Copy link
Contributor Author

@jiangzhx In the original UTs, there are some comments to explain why the plan is like this, For example:

exists_subquery_with_limit, in_correlated_subquery_with_limit

In some cases the limit is removed and the subquery is de-correlated, in some cases it is not.

Could you please add the comments back to the slt file ?

@mingmwang Following your suggestion, I have already made the changes. I hope you have time to help me review it again. thanks for your help.

Copy link
Contributor

@mingmwang mingmwang left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@alamb alamb merged commit 873d417 into apache:main Jun 19, 2023
@alamb
Copy link
Contributor

alamb commented Jun 19, 2023

Thank you @jiangzhx and @mingmwang

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

core Core DataFusion crate sqllogictest SQL Logic Tests (.slt)

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Port test in subqueries.rs from rust to sqllogictest

4 participants