Extract result of find_common_exprs into a struct
#4
Conversation
This file contains 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
alamb
changed the title
find_common_exprs into a strucgt
alamb
changed the title
find_common_exprs into a strucgtfind_common_exprs into a struct
alamb
commented
Aug 8, 2024
| build_common_expr_project_plan(input, common_exprs).map(|new_input| { | ||
| (new_window_expr_list, new_input, Some(window_expr_list)) | ||
| (new_exprs_list, new_input, Some(original_exprs_list)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I also renamed the local variables to follow the naming of the fields
| fn find_common_exprs( | ||
| &self, | ||
| exprs_list: Vec<Vec<Expr>>, | ||
| config: &dyn OptimizerConfig, | ||
| expr_mask: ExprMask, | ||
| ) -> Result<Transformed<(Vec<Vec<Expr>>, FindCommonExprResult)>> { | ||
| ) -> Result<Transformed<FoundCommonExprs>> { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The point of the PR is to make this change and the rest of the changes are a consequence of doign so
| .map(|new_input| (new_exprs, new_input)) | ||
| } | ||
| None => Ok((new_exprs, input)), | ||
| .map_data(|common| match common { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This isn't quite as concise as the previous version but I do think it is more explicit and easier to follow
peter-toth
approved these changes
Aug 8, 2024
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I like this refactor. Indeed this is much easier to follow. Thanks @alamb!
peter-toth
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 8, 2024
* Make `CommonSubexprEliminate` top-down like * fix top-down recursion, fix unit tests to use real a Optimizer to verify behavior on plans * Extract result of `find_common_exprs` into a struct (#4) * Extract the result of find_common_exprs into a struct * Make naming consistent --------- Co-authored-by: Andrew Lamb <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Here is a proposed refactor of apache#11683
I found the type signature of this
Where
to be hard to follow
Thus I propose pulling this into an
enumso the fields are namedI don't think this changes the logic or performance -- it is solely for readability
We can also merge apache#11683 and consider this proposal separately