LuciferYang commented on code in PR #67774:
URL: https://github.com/apache/doris/pull/67774#discussion_r4069228053


##########
be/src/exprs/function/functions_comparison.h:
##########
@@ -734,8 +844,11 @@ class FunctionComparison : public IFunction {
     }
 
     bool can_evaluate_zonemap_filter(const VExprSPtrs& arguments) const 
override {
-        return comparison_zonemap_detail::op_from_name(name).has_value() &&
-               comparison_zonemap_detail::can_evaluate(arguments);
+        if (!comparison_zonemap_detail::op_from_name(name).has_value()) {
+            return false;
+        }
+        return comparison_zonemap_detail::can_evaluate(arguments) ||
+               comparison_zonemap_detail::can_evaluate_slot_slot(arguments);

Review Comment:
   This is the same width-validation hole as #68148, reached through the newly 
widened v1 slot-slot gate rather than introduced here. #68148 adds 
`physical_stat_width_ok` at the top of the shared `parse_min_max_value`, which 
rejects a wrong-width INT32 / INT64 / FLOAT / DOUBLE / FIXED_LEN_BYTE_ARRAY / 
INT96 statistic with `DataQualityError` before any fixed-width dereference or 
buffer copy, so the parser falls back to no zone map. This PR is merge-ordered 
after #68148 and inherits that fence, the same arrangement as the v1 timestamp 
(#68118) and placeholder-column (#67995) dependencies already tracked here. The 
oversized BYTE_ARRAY-decimal variant is being hardened in #68148 too, which 
covers the decimal slot-slot path this gate newly admits. No change here, and 
#67774 will not merge ahead of #68148.



-- 
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]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to