siddharthteotia commented on a change in pull request #8029:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/pull/8029#discussion_r787216329
##########
File path:
pinot-core/src/main/java/org/apache/pinot/core/query/request/context/QueryContext.java
##########
@@ -85,6 +85,7 @@
// Keep the BrokerRequest to make incremental changes
// TODO: Remove it once the whole query engine is using the QueryContext
private final BrokerRequest _brokerRequest;
+ private QueryContext _preAggregateGapFillQueryContext;
Review comment:
> even if it might impact the subquery feature, it can be fixed as part
of the subquery feature development.
This ^^ is what I am concerned about. We are making changes to the wire
object. We will have to live with it and if the decision taken now somehow does
not hold for generic subquery then we will find ourselves retro-fitting
subquery onto what we do now.
Note that generic subquery does not only include subquery in FROM clause but
also in WHERE and other parts of a subquery. I haven't spend full time figuring
out how to model all kinds of subquery in Pinot so just being extra careful
here.
I think generic subquery will work and will be more cleaner. So may be let's
go with it
--
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: commits-unsubscr...@pinot.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscr...@pinot.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commits-h...@pinot.apache.org
