Skip to content

branch-3.0: [fix](constant fold)Make sure FE cast double to varchar generate identical result with BE. #50425 #50666

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Merged
dataroaring merged 1 commit into from
May 8, 2025
Merged

branch-3.0: [fix](constant fold)Make sure FE cast double to varchar generate identical result with BE. #50425 #50666

dataroaring merged 1 commit into from
May 8, 2025

Conversation

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

@github-actions github-actions bot commented May 7, 2025

Cherry-picked from #50425

@Jibing-Li
[fix](constant fold)Make sure FE cast double to varchar generate iden…
5364bb5 
…tical result with BE. (#50425)

### What problem does this PR solve?

BE side use fmt::format_to to cast double to string, FE use
Double.toString(), we need to make sure FE and BE generate identical
cast result:
e.g. 1E10 -> 1e+10, NaN-> nan,  Infinity -> inf
Besides, when the double literal value is larger than 1E16 or less than
-1E16, skip FE side constant folding because we don't know the exact
behavior of fmt::format_to, so skip FE side constant folding and leave
the cast operation to BE.
@github-actions github-actions bot requested a review from dataroaring as a code owner May 7, 2025 10:33
@Thearas
Copy link
Contributor

Thearas commented May 7, 2025

Thank you for your contribution to Apache Doris.
Don't know what should be done next? See How to process your PR.

Please clearly describe your PR:

  1. What problem was fixed (it's best to include specific error reporting information). How it was fixed.
  2. Which behaviors were modified. What was the previous behavior, what is it now, why was it modified, and what possible impacts might there be.
  3. What features were added. Why was this function added?
  4. Which code was refactored and why was this part of the code refactored?
  5. Which functions were optimized and what is the difference before and after the optimization?

@dataroaring dataroaring closed this May 7, 2025
@dataroaring dataroaring reopened this May 7, 2025
@Thearas
Copy link
Contributor

Thearas commented May 7, 2025

run buildall

@Jibing-Li
Copy link
Contributor

Jibing-Li commented May 7, 2025

run feut

dataroaring
dataroaring approved these changes May 8, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@dataroaring dataroaring left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@dataroaring dataroaring merged commit f35cc6a into branch-3.0 May 8, 2025
22 of 24 checks passed
@github-actions github-actions bot deleted the auto-pick-50425-branch-3.0 branch May 8, 2025 01:54
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@dataroaring dataroaring dataroaring approved these changes

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@Thearas @Jibing-Li @dataroaring