Rename is_ordered_set_aggregate to supports_within_group_clause for UDAFs
#18397
+39
−35
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
github-actions
bot
added
documentation
alamb
approved these changes
Oct 31, 2025
| pub fn is_ordered_set_aggregate(&self) -> bool { | ||
| self.inner.is_ordered_set_aggregate() | ||
| /// See [`AggregateUDFImpl::supports_within_group_clause`] for more details. | ||
| pub fn supports_within_group_clause(&self) -> bool { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this is a breaking API change, as you have pointed out in the PR description and upgrade guide
|
Thank you @Jefffrey |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Which issue does this PR close?
AggregateUDFImpl::is_ordered_set_aggregatetoAggregateUDFImpl::supports_within_group_clause#18280Rationale for this change
AggregateUDFImpl::is_ordered_set_aggregateis confusingly named as all it does currently is permit usage ofWITHIN GROUPSQL syntax. I don't think it would have any functionality in the future beyond this. Also makes it easier if in future we decide to implement hypothetical-set aggregate functions too, since we wouldn't need ais_hypothetical_set_aggregatevariation either.What changes are included in this PR?
Rename
AggregateUDFImpl::is_ordered_set_aggregatetoAggregateUDFImpl::supports_within_group_clause.Are these changes tested?
Existing tests.
Are there any user-facing changes?
Yes. Added section to upgrade guide.