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
[QP] Fix confusion of expressions with the same name as columns #39255
Conversation
This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking. Join @bshepherdson and the rest of your teammates on Graphite |
d3d572e
to
1d62491
Compare
|
70c7c4d
to
30ccd18
Compare
30ccd18
to
3fe16d5
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
(defn- field-requires-original-field-name | ||
"JSON extraction fields need to be named with their outer `field-name`, not use any existing `::desired-alias`." | ||
[field-clause] | ||
(boolean (some-> field-clause field-instance :nfc-path))) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is there a test for this situation?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, but unfortunately they're DB-specific because JSON unfolding support is not widespread.
…olumns" Manual backport of #39255 to 48.
When determining column aliases in
add-alias-info
, reuse an existingdesired column alias if one is present.
Fixes #39059. Might fix #25931.