-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/28488/#review63161
-----------------------------------------------------------



exec/java-exec/src/main/java/org/apache/drill/exec/planner/sql/DrillSqlOperator.java
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/28488/#comment105347>

    Previously we would have returned ANY type in this situation (when the old 
constructor with 2 argument is called). Now we would call deriveType() in the 
parent class...I would think that would cause some issue but maybe there are no 
callers of the old constructor ?



exec/java-exec/src/test/java/org/apache/drill/exec/expr/fn/impl/TestSimpleRepeatedFunctions.java
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/28488/#comment105346>

    you could add a second query that has WHERE true AND repeated_contains(...) 
 which matches the WHERE clause in DRILL-1729.


- Aman Sinha


On Nov. 26, 2014, 11:53 p.m., Hanifi Gunes wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/28488/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Nov. 26, 2014, 11:53 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for drill and Aman Sinha.
> 
> 
> Bugs: DRILL-1729
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DRILL-1729
> 
> 
> Repository: drill-git
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> derive & infer result type for boolean returning custom functions so that 
> optiq can validate and execute user queries seamlessly
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   
> exec/java-exec/src/main/java/org/apache/drill/exec/expr/fn/DrillFunctionRegistry.java
>  399f302 
>   
> exec/java-exec/src/main/java/org/apache/drill/exec/planner/sql/DrillSqlOperator.java
>  55a8595 
>   
> exec/java-exec/src/test/java/org/apache/drill/exec/expr/fn/impl/TestSimpleRepeatedFunctions.java
>  PRE-CREATION 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/28488/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Hanifi Gunes
> 
>

Reply via email to