Fix bug in JoinToTimeSpine dataflow plans
#1577
Merged
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
courtneyholcomb
added
Skip Changelog
Run Tests With Other SQL Engines
courtneyholcomb
temporarily deployed
to
DW_INTEGRATION_TESTS
GitHub Actions
Inactive
courtneyholcomb
temporarily deployed
to
DW_INTEGRATION_TESTS
GitHub Actions
Inactive
courtneyholcomb
temporarily deployed
to
DW_INTEGRATION_TESTS
GitHub Actions
Inactive
courtneyholcomb
temporarily deployed
to
DW_INTEGRATION_TESTS
GitHub Actions
Inactive
github-actions
bot
removed
the
Run Tests With Other SQL Engines
courtneyholcomb
force-pushed
the
court/custom-offset2
branch
from
68c9435 to
3710873
Compare
courtneyholcomb
force-pushed
the
court/custom-offset3
branch
from
4765589 to
9cccb81
Compare
courtneyholcomb
force-pushed
the
court/custom-offset2
branch
from
3710873 to
d54bc63
Compare
courtneyholcomb
force-pushed
the
court/custom-offset3
branch
from
9cccb81 to
2018b8d
Compare
courtneyholcomb
force-pushed
the
court/custom-offset2
branch
from
d54bc63 to
ca93230
Compare
courtneyholcomb
force-pushed
the
court/custom-offset3
branch
from
2018b8d to
eeb0105
Compare
WilliamDee
approved these changes
Dec 19, 2024
| @@ -325,6 +325,7 @@ def test_aggregate_output_join_metric_predicate_pushdown( | |||
| ) | |||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
| @pytest.mark.skip("Predicate pushdown is not implemented for some of the nodes in this plan") | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
were these passing before this change 🤔
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes! The optimizers weren't correctly going through all the parent nodes, so this was never hitting the AliasSpecsNode. That node is new and doesn't have an implementation for the pushdown optimizer.
courtneyholcomb
force-pushed
the
court/custom-offset2
branch
from
ca93230 to
1b71261
Compare
We weren't tracking the parent nodes properly, which resulted in improper optimization and nodes missing when displaying the plan. This should not impact the output data, but will hopefully improve query efficiency now that more CTEs are enabled.
courtneyholcomb
force-pushed
the
court/custom-offset3
branch
from
eeb0105 to
97b59b0
Compare
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.
We weren't tracking the parent nodes properly, which resulted in improper optimization and nodes missing when displaying the plan. This should not impact the output data, but will hopefully improve query efficiency now that more CTEs are enabled.