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

fix-3091 added simple mapping for constatnt expressions #382

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Aug 17, 2023

Conversation

bhavnajindal
Copy link

@bhavnajindal bhavnajindal commented Aug 9, 2023

Issue: https://github.ibm.com/ClickHouse/issue-repo/issues/3091

Changelog category (leave one):

  • Improvement

Changelog entry (a user-readable short description of the changes that goes to CHANGELOG.md):

Requirement was to add a direct mapping without using expression inside the array. Therefore, now computing the index first and then passing it to CH SQL only for constant numerical expressions.

Query:
select * from kql(events | project custom_prop_value[0] | take 1)

Output:

SELECT *
FROM
(
    SELECT custom_prop_value[1] AS Column1
    FROM events
    LIMIT 1
)

@bkuschel
Copy link
Member

bkuschel commented Aug 9, 2023

This is an automated comment for commit ef5abbf with description of existing statuses. It's updated for the latest CI running
The full report is available here
The overall status of the commit is 🔴 failure

Check nameDescriptionStatus
Style CheckRuns a set of checks to keep the code style clean. If some of tests failed, see the related log from the report🔴 failure

Copy link

@kashwy kashwy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

add some test cases of negative index

},
{
"print A[B[1]]",
"SELECT A[if((B[if(1 >= 0, 1 + 1, 1)]) >= 0, (B[if(1 >= 0, 1 + 1, 1)]) + 1, B[if(1 >= 0, 1 + 1, 1)])] AS print_0"
"SELECT A[if((B[2]) >= 0, (B[2]) + 1, B[2])] AS print_0"
Copy link

@kashwy kashwy Aug 11, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

can this recursive case be solved too?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We would need to get the value of B[2] to correctly map it, which isn't available during Parsing. Therefore, treating B[2] as an arbitrary expression.

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We would need to get the value of B[2] to correctly map it, which isn't available during Parsing. Therefore, treating B[2] as an arbitrary expression.

ok, that's good

@bhavnajindal bhavnajindal merged commit d2d528d into Kusto-phase3 Aug 17, 2023
12 of 16 checks passed
kashwy pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 19, 2023
…382)

* fix-3091 added simple mapping for constatnt expressions

* fixed unit tests

* added testcase for negetive array index
kothiga pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 9, 2023
…382)

* fix-3091 added simple mapping for constatnt expressions

* fixed unit tests

* added testcase for negetive array index
kothiga pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 11, 2024
…382)

* fix-3091 added simple mapping for constatnt expressions

* fixed unit tests

* added testcase for negetive array index
kothiga pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 7, 2024
…382)

* fix-3091 added simple mapping for constatnt expressions

* fixed unit tests

* added testcase for negetive array index
SuzyWangIBMer pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 11, 2024
…382)

* fix-3091 added simple mapping for constatnt expressions

* fixed unit tests

* added testcase for negetive array index
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants