Skip to content

[FLINK-33941][table-planner] use field index instead of field name about window time column#23991

Merged
LadyForest merged 2 commits intoapache:masterfrom
xuyangzhong:FLINK-33941
Jan 4, 2024
Merged

[FLINK-33941][table-planner] use field index instead of field name about window time column#23991
LadyForest merged 2 commits intoapache:masterfrom
xuyangzhong:FLINK-33941

Conversation

@xuyangzhong
Copy link
Contributor

@xuyangzhong xuyangzhong commented Dec 26, 2023

What is the purpose of the change

In some exec nodes like StreamExecGroupWindowAggregate and some rules like BatchPhysicalWindowAggregateRule, planner uses "AggregateUtil#timeFieldIndex" to access the actual time field index, instead of using the time field index in LogicalWindow#timeAttribute directly. However, it would be more formal to use the field index instead of the column field.

Brief change log

  • Deprecate AggregateUtil#timeFieldIndex
  • Update the code using "AggregateUtil.timeFieldIndex(input.getRowType, call.builder(), window.timeAttribute)" before to use "window.timeAttribute.getFieldIndex"
  • Fix the rule that doesn't update the index in window before while optimizing plan

Verifying this change

All existent tests can cover this fix.

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, Kubernetes/Yarn, 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? no

@flinkbot
Copy link
Collaborator

flinkbot commented Dec 26, 2023

CI report:

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

@LadyForest LadyForest self-requested a review December 26, 2023 07:18
Copy link
Contributor

@LadyForest LadyForest left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hi @xuyangzhong, thanks for the contribution! The PR looks good and I just left one minor comment.

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.

3 participants