Draft: Extend Expr::ScalarFunction to support Expr for ScalarUDF
#8180
Conversation
This file contains 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
2010YOUY01
commented
Nov 14, 2023
| /// ScalarFunction expression | ||
| #[derive(Clone, PartialEq, Eq, Hash, Debug)] | ||
| pub struct ScalarFunction { | ||
| /// The function | ||
| pub fun: built_in_function::BuiltinScalarFunction, | ||
| pub func_def: ScalarFunctionDefinition, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is the API change
| })?; | ||
|
|
||
| fun.return_type(&arg_data_types) | ||
| Expr::ScalarFunction(ScalarFunction { func_def, args }) => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There might have ~10 similar changes like this one during optimization/planning.
Expr::ScalarUDF branch above will be moved inside
|
This looks pretty neat @2010YOUY01
I am not sure of other concerns -- perhaps it is worth doing a quick prototype / POC, similar to this PR, of what approach 1 would look like? |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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?
POC for #8157
Rationale for this change
Based on discussion in #8157 , there are two ways to implement
Exprcreation forScalarUDF:Expr::ScalarUDFExpr::ScalarFunctionThis draft wants to show how approach 2 will look like
pro: This way can encapsulate the execution path for
BuitlinScalarFunctionandScalarUDFtogether (but actually is a slight cleanup instead of unification), which can make future work toward #8045 a little bit easier (when debugging core during migration)con: Larger modifications to the core code (see comments)
I don't have a strong preference between 1 and 2 for the above reasons, is there any other concerns for approach 1? @alamb
What changes are included in this PR?
Are these changes tested?
Are there any user-facing changes?
Yes, see comments