jinxing64 commented on issue #1324: [CALCITE-3203] When matching materializations, match Project with child of Aggregate URL: https://github.com/apache/calcite/pull/1324#issuecomment-523786270 @hsyuan Thanks for your kind reminder. Actually I think this case can be replaced by https://github.com/apache/calcite/pull/1384 The matching pattern proposed in this PR is like below: ``` query: Project(projects: [$0, *(2, $1)]) Aggregate(groupSet: {0}, groupSets: [{0}], calls: [SUM($1)]) Scan(table: [hr, emps]) target: Project(projects: [$0, *(2, $1), *(2, $2)]) Aggregate(groupSet: {0}, groupSets: [{0}], calls: [SUM($1), COUNT()]) Scan(table: [hr, emps]) ``` The matching pattern proposed in https://github.com/apache/calcite/pull/1384 is like below: ``` query: Project(projects: [$0, +($1, 2)]) Project(projects: [$1, $3, $4]) Rel-A target: Project(projects: [$1, +($3, 2)]) Rel-A ``` I think the second pattern is more general and I added the test case in this PR to https://github.com/apache/calcite/pull/1384 How do you think ? Which one is preferred ? If https://github.com/apache/calcite/pull/1384 makes sense, it's great if you can shepherd and take a review. Then I will close this PR.
---------------------------------------------------------------- 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: [email protected] With regards, Apache Git Services
