kmozaid commented on PR #16836: URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/pull/16836#issuecomment-3409002258
> If we end up taking another approach, we will integrate `AvgMVValueAggregator` in this PR into the existing `AvgValueAggregator`, and not having `AvgMV` function for Star-Tree Index. Basically the changes in this PR is no longer needed, and `Avg` can be used to handle both SV and MV. I feel that is a cleaner solution (no need to handle SV in MV function), and more user friendly. Ok I think, I understood what you are suggesting - 1. We don't need to support StarTree index with MV functions, like `MultiValueFieldName__AVGMV` (instead one must use regular function `MultiValueFieldName__AVG`). 2. Instead of implementing `AvgMVValueAggregator`, AvgValueAggregator` should be updated for supporting StarTree creation for MultiValueField. 3. The current implementation of single value functions, for e.g. `AvgAggregationFunction` function does not support multi value field aggregation, the support needs to be added. The regular function implicitly support StarTree single value requirement. For AVG, it has check `blockValSet.getValueType() != DataType.BYTES` which is for StarTree and for SUM, it has a case statement handling Double data type which is also the type of StarTree aggregated data. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
