Thanks for the feedback Julian. I will take a look at the Morel issue. On Mon, Jan 17, 2022 at 11:12 PM Julian Hyde <[email protected]> wrote:
> Thanks for the heads up. There was a good reason that we marked > RepeatUnion experimental: so that we can make these improvements without > anyone complaining. I welcome these changes evolving RepeatUnion into a > more useful feature. > > By the way, in Morel I am having some deep discussions about the best way > to surface ‘recursive’ or ‘iterative’ or ‘fixed point’ queries should be > surfaced in a relational/functional language [1]. Morel’s goal is to > execute programs both locally and via Calcite relational algebra, so Morel > will at some point use RepeatUnion. > > Julian > > [1] https://github.com/julianhyde/morel/issues/81 < > https://github.com/julianhyde/morel/issues/81> > > > On Jan 17, 2022, at 8:49 AM, Ruben Q L <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hello everyone, > > > > I am not sure if anyone else (apart from my downstream project) is using > > RepeatUnion and associated operators to build recursive unions > > (experimental feature implemented via [1]), but just in case: I am > > considering a patch to fix some known issues ([2] & [3]) on the current > > implementation. > > This patch might potentially break the current contract of this operator, > > so if you think that you may be impacted by this change, please do not > > hesitate to take a look at the PR [4] and contribute to the discussion in > > there. > > > > Thanks and best regards, > > Ruben > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2812 > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-3673 > > [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-4054 > > [4] https://github.com/apache/calcite/pull/2690 > >
