berkaysynnada opened a new pull request, #7475:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/pull/7475
## Which issue does this PR close?
<!--
We generally require a GitHub issue to be filed for all bug fixes and
enhancements and this helps us generate change logs for our releases. You can
link an issue to this PR using the GitHub syntax. For example `Closes #123`
indicates that this PR will close issue #123.
-->
Closes #7474 .
## Rationale for this change
<!--
Why are you proposing this change? If this is already explained clearly in
the issue then this section is not needed.
Explaining clearly why changes are proposed helps reviewers understand your
changes and offer better suggestions for fixes.
-->
To take precautions against the problems that may be caused by the duration
vs. time interval operations (described in the issue) during the constraint
propagation.
## What changes are included in this PR?
<!--
There is no need to duplicate the description in the issue here but it is
sometimes worth providing a summary of the individual changes in this PR.
-->
In the `propagate_arithmetic` function, if there is a time interval child,
we follow such a path:
**a.** If the time interval is a singleton, we do not need to propagate over
it. We leave it unchanged and only propagate to the other child.
**b.** If the time interval is columnar data, we check its bounds. If any
interval bounds contain a month field, we return an error because we can't
accurately convert it to a duration type without a valid timestamp reference.
Otherwise, we simply convert the bounds to a duration type, and after the
propagation, we convert the duration back to the time interval type again.
In the `propagate_comparison` function, a similar behavior is applied.
However, Datafusion does not allow to perform on interval vs. duration yet
(`get_result_type` function gives an error).
## Are these changes tested?
<!--
We typically require tests for all PRs in order to:
1. Prevent the code from being accidentally broken by subsequent changes
2. Serve as another way to document the expected behavior of the code
If tests are not included in your PR, please explain why (for example, are
they covered by existing tests)?
-->
Yes.
## Are there any user-facing changes?
<!--
If there are user-facing changes then we may require documentation to be
updated before approving the PR.
-->
<!--
If there are any breaking changes to public APIs, please add the `api
change` label.
-->
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
