planner: fix wrong result when pushing Agg down through Union in MPP plans #46310
Conversation
Signed-off-by: AilinKid <314806019@qq.com>
ti-chi-bot
bot
added
release-note
|
Hi @AilinKid. Thanks for your PR. PRs from untrusted users cannot be marked as trusted with I understand the commands that are listed here. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
Codecov Report
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #46310 +/- ##
================================================
+ Coverage 73.3559% 73.4717% +0.1158%
================================================
Files 1284 1326 +42
Lines 393258 409466 +16208
================================================
+ Hits 288478 300842 +12364
- Misses 86416 90120 +3704
- Partials 18364 18504 +140
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
|
Signed-off-by: AilinKid <314806019@qq.com>
Signed-off-by: AilinKid <314806019@qq.com>
|
/test unit-test |
|
@AilinKid: Cannot trigger testing until a trusted user reviews the PR and leaves an In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
| finalAggAdjust := func(aggFuncs []*aggregation.AggFuncDesc) { | ||
| for _, agg := range aggFuncs { | ||
| if agg.Mode == aggregation.FinalMode && agg.Name == ast.AggFuncCount { | ||
| agg.Name = ast.AggFuncSum |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
count() returns integer result type, does sum in TiFlash also return integer?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
make sense, addressed
There was a problem hiding this comment.
by the way, sum(arg) should return the same type with its args, now its arg come from sub-split-count, so the return type should be the same
Signed-off-by: AilinKid <314806019@qq.com>
ti-chi-bot
bot
added
needs-cherry-pick-release-5.3
ti-chi-bot
bot
added
size/L
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: fixdb, qw4990 The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
ti-chi-bot
bot
added
approved
lgtm
and removed
needs-1-more-lgtm
|
In response to a cherrypick label: new pull request created to branch |
Signed-off-by: ti-chi-bot <ti-community-prow-bot@tidb.io>
|
In response to a cherrypick label: new pull request created to branch |
Signed-off-by: ti-chi-bot <ti-community-prow-bot@tidb.io>
|
In response to a cherrypick label: new pull request created to branch |
Signed-off-by: ti-chi-bot <ti-community-prow-bot@tidb.io>
|
In response to a cherrypick label: new pull request created to branch |
Signed-off-by: ti-chi-bot <ti-community-prow-bot@tidb.io>
|
In response to a cherrypick label: new pull request created to branch |
Signed-off-by: ti-chi-bot <ti-community-prow-bot@tidb.io>
What problem does this PR solve?
Issue Number: close #45850
Problem Summary:
What is changed and how it works?
Check List
Tests
Side effects
Documentation
Release note
Please refer to Release Notes Language Style Guide to write a quality release note.