carloea2 commented on PR #3774: URL: https://github.com/apache/texera/pull/3774#issuecomment-3404238907
> I do not know what what be the exact use case to sort a binary field. But I just do not want user to select a binary field to sort and get an exception. I think we can support it, and let user decide whether sort binary is useful or not. If we do not support it, then we need to add a frontend logic to disallow user selecting field in binary type. > […](#) > On Oct 14, 2025 at 3:02 PM -0700, carloea2 ***@***.***>, wrote: @carloea2 commented on this pull request. In common/workflow-operator/src/main/scala/org/apache/amber/operator/sort/StableMergeSortOpExec.scala: > + throw new IllegalStateException(s"Unsupported attribute type $other in StableMergeSort") + } Yes, but I wonder if it is binary, then greater or lower will greatly depend on the user context, no? If it is just by value, why not using another corresponding data type such as long? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe. You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***> @chenlica could you share your thoughts? I’m inclined to show a warning when a user tries to sort a binary field as @Yicong-Huang mentioned, maybe something like: “Sorting on binary fields isn’t supported.” The warning would suggest using a sortable representation (e.g., extract a feature, length/hash, or a derived numeric/string field). I think this improves UX by guiding users on what to do next. Any concerns? -- 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]
