Do not merge - Test df binding python#21095
Draft
coderfender wants to merge 14 commits intoapache:mainfrom
Draft
Do not merge - Test df binding python#21095coderfender wants to merge 14 commits intoapache:mainfrom
coderfender wants to merge 14 commits intoapache:mainfrom
Conversation
## 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 apache#123` indicates that this PR will close issue apache#123. --> Preparation for DataFusion release 53.0.0 - apache#19692 ## 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. --> ## 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. --> ## 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)? --> ## 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. -->
…apache#20680) ## Which issue does this PR close? N/A ## Rationale for this change Backport for apache#20625 When enabling the `recursive_protection` feature for the `datafusion` crate, the `sql` feature is enabled. This is undesirable if the downstream project would like the `sql` feature to be off. ## What changes are included in this PR? Use the `?` syntax for features of dependencies for `recursive_protection`. This was already correctly done for other features such as `unicode_expressions`. <https://doc.rust-lang.org/cargo/reference/features.html> ## Are these changes tested? N/A ## Are there any user-facing changes? This makes dependency management better for downstream projects and is not a breaking change. ## 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 apache#123` indicates that this PR will close issue apache#123. --> - Closes #. ## 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. --> ## 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. --> ## 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)? --> ## 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. --> Co-authored-by: Heran Lin <heran@lakesail.com>
…he#20677) (apache#20700) Backport apache#20677 to the 53 release branch.
…) queries (#… (apache#20726) …20710) ## 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 apache#123` indicates that this PR will close issue apache#123. --> - Closes apache#20669 . ## Rationale for this change Return probe_side.len() for count(*) queries <!-- 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. --> <!-- 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. --> ## Are these changes tested? slt tests <!-- 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)? --> ## 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. --> ## 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 apache#123` indicates that this PR will close issue apache#123. --> - Closes #. ## 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. --> ## 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. --> ## 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)? --> ## 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. -->
) ## Which issue does this PR close? - Closes apache#20704 ## Rationale for this change FFI_TableOptions fails with a warning that is getting swallowed in the unit tests. ## What changes are included in this PR? Correctly check format for table options. ## Are these changes tested? Unit tests updated. ## Are there any user-facing changes? None, internal only. ## Context Related to apache#20705 but targetting `branch-53`.
…tor::Colon` (apache#20717) ## Which issue does this PR close? - part of apache#19692 <!-- 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 apache#123` indicates that this PR will close issue apache#123. --> - Needed in datafusion-contrib/datafusion-variant#26 - Backport of apache#20628 on v53 branch. ## 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. --> - `sqlparser-rs` currently exposes the colon operator (`:`) as a special `JsonAccess` expression. So it fails in datafusion's parsing before an `ExprPlanner` is even invoked. - Add `Operator::Colon`. Currently it's not used/implemented in datafusion. ## 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. --> - Fixes the above problem by converting `JsonAccess` to a normal binary expr, on which the `ExprPlanner` is invoked and custom parsing can be done. ## 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)? --> Added tests. Also did a prototype of a custom `ExprPlanner` in datafusion-variant using this to convert colon operator to `variant_get` function - datafusion-contrib/datafusion-variant#31 ## 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. --> Add `Operator::Colon`
…size() to reduce memory pool interactions (apache#20733) Backport apache#20729 to `branch-53`.
github-actions
bot
added
documentation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
7 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Which issue does this PR close?
Rationale for this change
What changes are included in this PR?
Are these changes tested?
Are there any user-facing changes?