[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-3124?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17940050#comment-17940050
]
Alessandro Solimando edited comment on CALCITE-3124 at 4/2/25 9:22 AM:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This seems to be fixed in current "main", I can't reproduce it. Bisecting I got
to
[5b996bd59|https://github.com/apache/calcite/commit/5b996bd595cbe775f7534f14546db66241f32eda]
but I suspect this fixes the symptoms in the JDBC test rather than the issue
itself.
was (Author: asolimando):
This seems to be fixed in current "main", I can't reproduce it. Bisecting I got
to
[5b996bd59|https://github.com/apache/calcite/commit/5b996bd595cbe775f7534f14546db66241f32eda]
but I am suspecting it's because of the JDBC test rather than a fix for the
issue itself.
> Infinite rule matching when AggregateRemoveRule is enabled for SUM0
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CALCITE-3124
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-3124
> Project: Calcite
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Haisheng Yuan
> Assignee: Forward Xu
> Priority: Major
>
> Make the following changes (uncomment return clause) to AggregateRemoveRule,
> the test case {{JdbcTest.testHavingNot2}} won't complete due to infinite rule
> matching.
> {noformat}
> --- a/core/src/main/java/org/apache/calcite/rel/rules/AggregateRemoveRule.java
> +++ b/core/src/main/java/org/apache/calcite/rel/rules/AggregateRemoveRule.java
> @@ -102,7 +102,7 @@ public void onMatch(RelOptRuleCall call) {
> if (aggregation.getKind() == SqlKind.SUM0) {
> // Bail out for SUM0 to avoid potential infinite rule matching,
> // because it may be generated by transforming SUM aggregate
> // function to SUM0 and COUNT.
> - return;
> +// return;
> }
> final SqlSplittableAggFunction splitter =
> Objects.requireNonNull(
> {noformat}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
