gortiz commented on code in PR #14690:
URL: https://github.com/apache/pinot/pull/14690#discussion_r1899422869
##########
pinot-query-runtime/src/main/java/org/apache/pinot/query/runtime/plan/server/ServerPlanRequestVisitor.java:
##########
@@ -240,4 +250,14 @@ private boolean visit(PlanNode node,
ServerPlanRequestContext context) {
node.visit(this, context);
return context.getLeafStageBoundaryNode() == null;
}
+
+ private void applyTimestampIndex(Expression expression, PinotQuery
pinotQuery) {
+ RequestUtils.applyTimestampIndex(expression, pinotQuery);
+ Function functionCall = expression.getFunctionCall();
+ if (expression.isSetFunctionCall()) {
+ for (Expression operand : functionCall.getOperands()) {
+ applyTimestampIndex(operand, pinotQuery);
+ }
+ }
+ }
Review Comment:
Yes, it is a bit strange. That is the way V1 does it. I don't completely
understand why we do that on brokers instead of doing that on servers depending
on whether we have the column + index or not, the same way we do that with
other indexes.
--
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]
