Skip to content

Conversation

@godfreyhe
Copy link
Contributor

What is the purpose of the change

FlinkRelMdUniqueKeys#getTableUniqueKeys uses the original columns to find the index of primary keys. But after project push-down, the indexes is incorrect based on original columns, and the new columns should be used. This pr aims to fix it.

Brief change log

  • FlinkRelMdUniqueKeys gets incorrect result on TableScan after project push-down
  • Clean the unused code in FlinkRelMdUniqueKeys

Verifying this change

This change added tests and can be verified as follows:

  • Extended FlinkRelMdUniqueKeysTest to verify the change

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

  • Dependencies (does it add or upgrade a dependency): (yes / no)
  • The public API, i.e., is any changed class annotated with @Public(Evolving): (yes / no)
  • The serializers: (yes / no / don't know)
  • The runtime per-record code paths (performance sensitive): (yes / no / don't know)
  • Anything that affects deployment or recovery: JobManager (and its components), Checkpointing, Kubernetes/Yarn/Mesos, ZooKeeper: (yes / no / don't know)
  • The S3 file system connector: (yes / no / don't know)

Documentation

  • Does this pull request introduce a new feature? (yes / 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 caf54ac (Wed Mar 10 09:53:35 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.

Details
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

@lincoln-lil
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM!

@godfreyhe
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks for the review @lincoln-lil , I will merge this pr

godfreyhe added a commit to godfreyhe/flink that referenced this pull request Mar 12, 2021
@godfreyhe godfreyhe closed this in 0297b84 Mar 12, 2021
@godfreyhe godfreyhe deleted the FLINK-21710 branch March 12, 2021 02:34
godfreyhe added a commit to godfreyhe/flink that referenced this pull request Mar 12, 2021
…t result on TableScan after project push-down

This closes apache#15138

(cherry picked from commit 0297b84)
godfreyhe added a commit to godfreyhe/flink that referenced this pull request Mar 12, 2021
godfreyhe added a commit to godfreyhe/flink that referenced this pull request Mar 12, 2021
…t result on TableScan after project push-down

This closes apache#15138

(cherry picked from commit 0297b84)
godfreyhe added a commit to godfreyhe/flink that referenced this pull request Mar 12, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants