Closed
Conversation
| query, | ||
| resource, | ||
| groupByStrategy.processSubqueryResult(subquery, query, resource, finalizingResults, false) | ||
| groupByStrategy.processSubqueryResult(subquery, withoutSubtotals(query), resource, finalizingResults, false) |
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this needs more thinking. why weren't we passing query.withSubtotalsSpec(null) instead of query
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
some context is in here but not helpful - https://github.com/apache/druid/pull/5280/files#r181885318
I am concerned that modifying the query cause some problem down the line.
Contributor
|
@abhishekagarwal87 thanks for trying it out. As I commented in #10518 (comment), I prefer the original approach to this alternative. |
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
2 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
A different way to do #10518. This avoids the grouping aggregation on historicals by re-working the query that is sent to historicals. Historicals don't get grouping aggregation at all. However, now you have a mismatch in result row signatures that needs to be fixed up in a few places.