UDAF sum workaround
#741
Merged
UDAF sum workaround
#741
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
Michael-J-Ward
force-pushed
the
window-agg-api
branch
from
808b328
to
50cac4e
Compare
This is now exposed as part of the API to `first_value` and `last_value` functions. If there's a more elegant way to achieve this, please let me know.
andygrove
approved these changes
Jun 26, 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Part of #727
Ref #730
Which issue does this PR close?
sqlparser::ast::NullTreatmentwhich is now part of the UDAF api.Rationale for this change
AggregateFunction::Sumenum variant is still defined upstream, but can not be used.I suspect that the proper solution is to register the new UDAFs with the function registry.
But I'm unsure how that machinery should work.
As a workaround for releasing 39, I explicitly match on name == "sum" and redirect to the UDAF.
Are there any user-facing changes?
They get a new
NullTreatmentoption.Additional Context
I am uncertain about the design choices here, so please be critical.
Even if you choose to release this for v39, let me know how to improve it for next release.