hsyuan commented on a change in pull request #1333: [CALCITE-3214] Add
UnionToUnionRule for materialization matching.
URL: https://github.com/apache/calcite/pull/1333#discussion_r314569873
##########
File path:
core/src/main/java/org/apache/calcite/plan/MaterializedViewSubstitutionVisitor.java
##########
@@ -180,6 +182,39 @@ public UnifyResult apply(UnifyRuleCall call) {
}
}
+ /**
+ * Implementation of {@link SubstitutionVisitor.UnifyRule} that matches a
+ * {@link MutableUnion} to a {@link MutableUnion} where the query and target
+ * have the same inputs but might not have the same order.
+ */
+ private static class UnionToUnionRule extends AbstractUnifyRule {
+ public static final UnionToUnionRule INSTANCE = new UnionToUnionRule();
+
+ private UnionToUnionRule() {
+ super(any(MutableUnion.class), any(MutableUnion.class), 0);
+ }
+
+ public UnifyResult apply(UnifyRuleCall call) {
+ final MutableUnion query = (MutableUnion) call.query;
+ final MutableUnion target = (MutableUnion) call.target;
+ List<MutableRel> queryInputs = query.getInputs();
+ List<MutableRel> targetInputs = target.getInputs();
+ if (queryInputs.size() == targetInputs.size()) {
+ while (!queryInputs.isEmpty()) {
Review comment:
No, this is what I mean:
```
if (queryInputs.size() == targetInputs.size()) {
for (MutableRel rel： queryInputs) {
int index = targetInputs.indexOf(rel);
if (index == -1) {
return null;
} else {
targetInputs.remove(index);
}
}
}
```
You don't need to remove twice. Does this make sense?
----------------------------------------------------------------
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.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
With regards,
Apache Git Services
