That also makes sense. Since the similarity join branch is not merged yet, I will add them.
On Sat, Apr 14, 2018 at 16:05 Mike Carey <dtab...@gmail.com> wrote: > Question: Aren't there similarity join tests as well, though? (I.e., > is it not sufficient to let it defend itself, rather than also testing > its component parts?) > > > On 4/14/18 10:42 AM, Taewoo Kim wrote: > > For now, please do not remove AQL optimizer test cases since AQL+ > > functionality that is used for the similarity join depends on them. I > will > > go through runtime test cases and optimizer test cases and remove test > > cases that are covered by SQL++ test cases and that are not directly > > related to AQL+ functionality. > > > > Best, > > Taewoo > > > > On Sat, Apr 14, 2018 at 9:47 AM, Xikui Wang <xik...@uci.edu> wrote: > > > >> Hi Devs, > >> > >> As I mentioned in the weekly meeting, I found that our OptimizerTest > >> actually doesn't run the SQLPP tests. Although there is a separate > >> directory 'queries_sqlpp' which contains all the legacy optimizer tests > >> translated into SQLPP, they are not picked up by the OptimizerTest, and > the > >> new SQLPP tests are still being added to the old directory and mixed up > >> with AQL tests. > >> > >> I tried to run those SQLPP tests. More than half of them are failed. > There > >> are syntax error (query-issue838.sqlpp), variable name changes, join > >> algorithm changes (word-jaccard.sqlpp) and other changes > (issue730.sqlpp). > >> I submitted one patch that fixed the test cases with variable name > changes. > >> For the rests, I think we need to decide, between the two versions of > the > >> results, which ones are the expected plans and fix the errors. There are > >> some obvious patterns in the plan changes, so I think we only need to > fix a > >> few things to cover the rest 450 test cases... > >> > >> Best, > >> Xikui > >> > >
