vvivekiyer commented on code in PR #8518:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/pull/8518#discussion_r852301842
##########
pinot-common/src/main/java/org/apache/pinot/sql/parsers/rewriter/PredicateComparisonRewriter.java:
##########
@@ -18,21 +18,27 @@
*/
package org.apache.pinot.sql.parsers.rewriter;
+import java.util.ArrayList;
import java.util.Arrays;
import java.util.List;
+import org.apache.commons.lang3.EnumUtils;
import org.apache.pinot.common.request.Expression;
+import org.apache.pinot.common.request.ExpressionType;
import org.apache.pinot.common.request.Function;
import org.apache.pinot.common.request.PinotQuery;
import org.apache.pinot.common.utils.request.RequestUtils;
import org.apache.pinot.pql.parsers.pql2.ast.FilterKind;
import org.apache.pinot.sql.parsers.SqlCompilationException;
-
public class PredicateComparisonRewriter implements QueryRewriter {
@Override
public PinotQuery rewrite(PinotQuery pinotQuery) {
Expression filterExpression = pinotQuery.getFilterExpression();
if (filterExpression != null) {
+ filterExpression = updateBooleanPredicates(filterExpression, null);
Review Comment:
Done.
A question:
- Based on my understanding, we cannot have predicates that need to be
converted to boolean expression in a HAVING clause - because it'll always work
on an aggregation (eg: HAVING sum(field) > 10). Am I missing something?
- That's the reason I decided to not make these changes within
`updateComparisonPredicate` earlier.
--
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
