Skip to content
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.

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

Include join type in display implementation for logical plan #1620

Closed
james727 opened this issue Jan 20, 2022 · 2 comments · Fixed by #1674
Closed

Include join type in display implementation for logical plan #1620

james727 opened this issue Jan 20, 2022 · 2 comments · Fixed by #1674
Labels
datafusion Changes in the datafusion crate enhancement New feature or request good first issue Good for newcomers help wanted Extra attention is needed

Comments

@james727
Copy link
Contributor

james727 commented Jan 20, 2022

Is your feature request related to a problem or challenge? Please describe what you are trying to do.
Right now when printing a logical plan with a join there is no indication of the type of join involved. For example, the following can represent any one of a left/right/inner/full join:

Join: Using #test.a = #test2.a

Describe the solution you'd like
Update display to include the JoinType.

Additional context
This would be useful for testing #1585

@james727 james727 added the enhancement New feature or request label Jan 20, 2022
@houqp
Copy link
Member

houqp commented Jan 21, 2022

Good idea 👍

@houqp houqp added good first issue Good for newcomers help wanted Extra attention is needed labels Jan 21, 2022
@xudong963
Copy link
Member

A very useful feature, I'll implement it and use it. Thanks for your idea @james727

@alamb alamb added the datafusion Changes in the datafusion crate label Feb 10, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
datafusion Changes in the datafusion crate enhancement New feature or request good first issue Good for newcomers help wanted Extra attention is needed
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants