Skip to content

branch-4.0: [Fix](function) avoid false alarm of some datelike functions #59897 #59931

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
yiguolei merged 1 commit into from
Jan 16, 2026
Merged

branch-4.0: [Fix](function) avoid false alarm of some datelike functions #59897 #59931

yiguolei merged 1 commit into from
Jan 16, 2026

Conversation

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

@github-actions github-actions bot commented Jan 15, 2026

Cherry-picked from #59897

@zclllyybb
[Fix](function) avoid false alarm of some datelike functions (#59897)
12d5573 
join may generate null rows with unspecified nested value. may make some
functions with `use_default_implementation_of_null = true` raise false
positive alarm like `errCode = 2, detailMessage =
(172.20.56.1)[E-218]Operation date_trunc of out of range`.

this fix relates to some functions:
```
date_trunc
last_day
to_monday
unix_timestamp
from_seconds
from_milliseconds
from_microseconds
```
@github-actions github-actions bot requested a review from yiguolei as a code owner January 15, 2026 10:51
@hello-stephen
Copy link
Contributor

hello-stephen commented Jan 15, 2026

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 reopened this Jan 15, 2026
@hello-stephen
Copy link
Contributor

hello-stephen commented Jan 15, 2026

run buildall

@hello-stephen
Copy link
Contributor

hello-stephen commented Jan 15, 2026

BE UT Coverage Report

Increment line coverage 6.73% (7/104) 🎉

Increment coverage report
Complete coverage report

Category Coverage
Function Coverage 53.41% (18850/35293)
Line Coverage 39.26% (175003/445709)
Region Coverage 33.88% (135291/399327)
Branch Coverage 34.85% (58595/168149)

@yiguolei
Copy link
Contributor

yiguolei commented Jan 16, 2026

skip buildall

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor Author

github-actions bot commented Jan 16, 2026

PR approved by at least one committer and no changes requested.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by one committer. label Jan 16, 2026
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor Author

github-actions bot commented Jan 16, 2026

PR approved by anyone and no changes requested.

@yiguolei yiguolei merged commit a7d727b into branch-4.0 Jan 16, 2026
28 of 30 checks passed
@github-actions github-actions bot deleted the auto-pick-59897-branch-4.0 branch January 16, 2026 02:39
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@yiguolei yiguolei yiguolei approved these changes

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

approved Indicates a PR has been approved by one committer. reviewed

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@hello-stephen @yiguolei @dataroaring @zclllyybb