Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[FLINK-21621] [table-planner] Support TIMESTAMP_LTZ arithmetic #15133

Closed
wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

leonardBang
Copy link
Contributor

What is the purpose of the change

  • This pull request support TIMESTAMP_LTZ arithmetics like TIMESTAMP_LTZ + interval '1' DAY

Brief change log

  • Enable TIMESTAMP_LTZ type when generate Temporal PlusMinus code

Verifying this change

  • Add temporal arithmetics unit tests

Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:

  • Dependencies (does it add or upgrade a dependency): (no)
  • The public API, i.e., is any changed class annotated with @Public(Evolving): (no)
  • The serializers: (no)
  • The runtime per-record code paths (performance sensitive): ( no)
  • Anything that affects deployment or recovery: JobManager (and its components), Checkpointing, Yarn/Mesos, ZooKeeper: (no)
  • The S3 file system connector: (no)

Documentation

  • Does this pull request introduce a new feature? (no)
  • If yes, how is the feature documented? (not applicable / docs / JavaDocs / not documented)

@flinkbot
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks a lot for your contribution to the Apache Flink project. I'm the @flinkbot. I help the community
to review your pull request. We will use this comment to track the progress of the review.

Automated Checks

Last check on commit 3ff8f4a (Wed Mar 10 07:25:42 UTC 2021)

Warnings:

  • No documentation files were touched! Remember to keep the Flink docs up to date!

Mention the bot in a comment to re-run the automated checks.

Review Progress

  • ❓ 1. The [description] looks good.
  • ❓ 2. There is [consensus] that the contribution should go into to Flink.
  • ❓ 3. Needs [attention] from.
  • ❓ 4. The change fits into the overall [architecture].
  • ❓ 5. Overall code [quality] is good.

Please see the Pull Request Review Guide for a full explanation of the review process.


The Bot is tracking the review progress through labels. Labels are applied according to the order of the review items. For consensus, approval by a Flink committer of PMC member is required Bot commands
The @flinkbot bot supports the following commands:

  • @flinkbot approve description to approve one or more aspects (aspects: description, consensus, architecture and quality)
  • @flinkbot approve all to approve all aspects
  • @flinkbot approve-until architecture to approve everything until architecture
  • @flinkbot attention @username1 [@username2 ..] to require somebody's attention
  • @flinkbot disapprove architecture to remove an approval you gave earlier

@flinkbot
Copy link
Collaborator

flinkbot commented Mar 10, 2021

CI report:

Bot commands The @flinkbot bot supports the following commands:
  • @flinkbot run travis re-run the last Travis build
  • @flinkbot run azure re-run the last Azure build

@leonardBang
Copy link
Contributor Author

cc @KurtYoung Could you help review this? thanks

@leonardBang
Copy link
Contributor Author

Could you help take a look? @KurtYoung @wuchong

testSqlApi(
s"TIMESTAMPDIFF(MINUTE, ${timestampTz("1970-01-01 01:02:03.123")}," +
s" ${timestampTz("1970-01-01 00:00:00")})",
"-62")
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Shouldn't this be 62?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

no, you can look TIMESTAMPDIFF(MINUTE , TIMESTAMP, TIMESTAMP)

testSqlApi(
s"TIMESTAMPDIFF(SECOND, ${timestampTz("1970-01-01 00:00:00.123")}," +
s" ${timestampTz("1970-01-01 00:02:03.234")})",
"123")
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Shouldn't this be -123?

Copy link
Member

@wuchong wuchong left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM.

@wuchong wuchong closed this in 049f0e9 Mar 23, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
5 participants