I have created CALCITE-738 to follow-up on the tests issue.

Jesús


On 5/19/15, 1:49 AM, "Julian Hyde" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Wow, you're right. It's not used anywhere in Calcite. While I'd prefer
>that
>everything is tested, since it's not used, adding a test before the
>release
>is low priority.
>
>The easiest way to write a test is probably to follow the model of
>RexProgramTest. Create RexNodes, apply methods, test the results by
>applying toString or whatever.
>
>Better would be to look over the Hive code that uses splitJoinCondition
>(it
>seems to be called from HiveCalciteUtil and CalcitePlanner) and figure out
>whether any of it could/should be in Calcite, packaged for re-use (e.g. as
>a rule) and tested. There is a benefit to having well-tested library code
>but I recognize there is also a cost, so I'll leave it to you guys.
>
>Julian
>
>
>On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 2:40 PM, Jesus Camachorodriguez <
>[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I just checked it back and the problem is that the util function
>> splitCondition is not called in join.oq (neither from Calcite itself).
>>
>> What do you think? Should I create a new unit test specific to that
>> function? What would be the best place to do that?
>>
>> Jesús
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 5/18/15, 8:02 PM, "Julian Hyde" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >I've rebased your change and committed to my master branch[1] for
>>testing.
>> >I will go ahead and commit to apache master in about 24 hours. If you
>> >manage to create a better test case before then I will include it. But
>>if
>> >not I will still include your fix in the release.
>> >
>> >Julian
>> >
>> >[1]
>> >
>> 
>>https://github.com/julianhyde/incubator-calcite/commit/53b4b09606de5fe14f
>>4
>> >9e65a6d5b4346ec930a62
>> >
>> >On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Julian Hyde <[email protected]>
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >> I¹m not sure that your test case demonstrates the problem. I tried
>>the
>> >> test case (join.oq) without your code change (RelOptUtil.java) and it
>> >> passed.
>> >>
>> >> On May 18, 2015, at 6:19 AM, Jesus Camachorodriguez <
>> >> [email protected]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > I have created a new pull request with the test case for
>>CALCITE-688.
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks,
>> >> > Jesús
>> >> >
>> >> > On 5/17/15, 7:12 AM, "Julian Hyde" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> I'm close to making the first release candidate. The issues we
>>saw in
>> >> Hive
>> >> >> have been cleared up.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I'm going to commit
>> >>https://github.com/apache/incubator-calcite/pull/86
>> >> >> and
>> >> >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-calcite/pull/79 (both just
>>doc,
>> >>so
>> >> >> won't impact stability).
>> >> >>
>> >> >> And I'll need to write release notes.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Jesus, I'd like to commit
>> >> >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-calcite/pull/78 but I need a
>> test
>> >> >> case.
>> >> >> In join.oq would be the best place.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I'll look at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-259,
>> >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-712 and commit them
>>if
>> >> >> they're ready.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Other pull requests
>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-calcite/pulls
>> >> or
>> >> >> jira cases tagged "next"[1] don't look ready. Correct me if I've
>> >>missed
>> >> >> something.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Julian
>> >> >>
>> >> >> [1]
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> 
>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20CALCITE%20AND%
>> >>2
>> >> >> 0fixVersion%20%3D%20%22next%22%20
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>

Reply via email to