mohammadnaqvi04 opened a new pull request, #26677: URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/26677
> [!IMPORTANT] > > **Fork CI setup:** For pull requests from a fork to `main`, enable workflows in your fork's **Actions** tab before you push. > See the [fork CI setup guide](https://datafusion.apache.org/contributor-guide/#pull-requests-from-forks). ## 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. --> Part of #24960. This PR adds a safe rejection until `IN`/`NOT IN` count-bug compensation is implemented. ## 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. Please explain the problem you are trying to solve in terms of the user-visible behavior, rather than the implementation. For example, "The code in `foo.rs` doesn't handle nulls" is a symptom of the implementation. "COUNT(DISTINCT) returns wrong results when the column contains nulls" is the user-visible problem. --> A correlated `IN`/`NOT IN` over an aggregate without `GROUP BY` returns wrong rows when an outer row has no match (see https://github.com/apache/datafusion/issues/24960#issuecomment-6367423894). #25391 fixed `EXISTS`/`NOT EXISTS`. `IN`/`NOT IN` will be covered in a follow-up, so until then these queries should error instead of returning wrong results. ## 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. --> `build_join` in `decorrelate_predicate_subquery.rs` now returns a not-implemented error for these subqueries. The exception is an `IN` in a `WHERE` over an aggregate that is NULL on empty input (e.g. `max`, `sum`), which the current rewrite already answers correctly. ## What is the testing strategy for this PR? <!-- 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 Briefly describe how this PR is tested, and point to the specific tests you added. For example: 'This new feature is covered by the `sqllogictest` cases added in `foo.slt`'. If this PR does not add tests, explain why. For example, if the change is already covered by existing tests, please mention it. You should also check the `codecov` bot reply on this PR to confirm the changed code is exercised. --> - The existing IN over max test still passes unchanged. - The existing NOT IN over count test now expects the error. - New tests expect the error for IN over count in a filter and in a projection, NOT IN over max, and IN over max in a projection. ## 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. --> These queries now return a not-implemented error instead of wrong results. -- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
