Haisheng Yuan created CALCITE-3918:
--
Summary: SubQueryFilterRemoveRule failed to decorrelate subquery
for TPCH q17
Key: CALCITE-3918
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-3918
Project: C
Haisheng Yuan created CALCITE-3917:
--
Summary: Revive pruned node when a rule generates RelNode that is
already pruned
Key: CALCITE-3917
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-3917
Project
Haisheng Yuan created CALCITE-3916:
--
Summary: Apply rules bottom up by RelSet
Key: CALCITE-3916
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-3916
Project: Calcite
Issue Type: Improveme
Thanks again for taking the lead on this Francis!
Personally, I am quite busy these days but will do my best to check 1-2 PRs.
On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 2:57 PM Josh Elser wrote:
> Always a good idea.
>
> I'll add this to my list and see if I can help get any committed. It's
> been a while since
Hi Roman,
That was it! I wasn't calling convert on the inputs to the join recursively.
Many thanks.
On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 at 15:00, Roman Kondakov
wrote:
> Hi Tim,
>
> it looks like your physical converter rule for a Join node does not
> convert it's inputs to your custom FLOWDB convention. And
I have to admit that this is the most error-prone point when creating physical
operator for first time user. Perhaps we can add some highlighted notes or
examples to site docs to prevent people making similar mistake again.
In Calcite, logical / physical operator is not only operator, but also p
Hi Tim,
it looks like your physical converter rule for a Join node does not
convert it's inputs to your custom FLOWDB convention. And because of it
the PhysicalJoin is trying to get input rows from the LogicalScan.
You have:
PhysicalJoin[FLOWDB]
LogicalTableScan[NONE] <- logical rels have infin
Hi All,
I have recently started using Calcite as the query parser/planner for a
side project. I have created a set of RelNodes corresponding to my physical
nodes, and a set of rules. I have created my own convention.
All works well for queries without a join - my physical nodes are
created fine (
Hi Vineet,
This reminds of the discussions in [1,2] and it seems that we maintain code
that does similar stuff in more than one places. Is there a way to unify
the code and normalize row expressions in a single place?
Best,
Stamatis
[1]
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/54bf3ed733eb7e725ce3ea
