Julian, so.. is it correct to translate TimestampString to java.sql.Timestamp on RexToLixTranslator.convert(...) level as in pull request https://github.com/apache/calcite/pull/900/commits ?
I hope so, then I could revoke pull request https://github.com/apache/calcite/pull/878 On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 9:34 PM Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org> wrote: > Yeah, TimestampString is for SqlNode and RexNode only. Not JDBC code. > Likewise DateString, TimeString, NlsString. Sorry the doc didn’t make that > clear. Although frankly it’s impractical to document all of the places > something is NOT used. > > > On Nov 5, 2018, at 5:49 AM, ptr.bo...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > Vladimir, > > > > I thought that TimestampString IS the appropriate type :D (knowledge > based > > on Rexbuilder code, where TimestampString is being created as > RexLiteral). > > > > My problem is that I don't see what is the scope of TimestampString, > > DateString, etc in Calcite. Does it span to Rel/Rex tree? Or it should > not? > > This is why I've created two different patches :( > > > > Any help with the responsibility of TimestampString appreciated. Without > it > > - bug is still there and I could create lots of other mishit patches. > > -- Piotr Bojko http://about.me/ptr.bojko
