> On Jan. 20, 2015, 8:45 a.m., Amareshwari Sriramadasu wrote:
> > lens-cube/src/test/java/org/apache/lens/cube/parse/TestCubeRewriter.java, 
> > line 50
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/29881/diff/3/?file=826092#file826092line50>
> >
> >     Can we undo this change?

This was due to the same.


> On Jan. 20, 2015, 8:45 a.m., Amareshwari Sriramadasu wrote:
> > lens-cube/src/main/java/org/apache/lens/cube/parse/GroupbyResolver.java, 
> > line 114
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/29881/diff/3/?file=826091#file826091line114>
> >
> >     I'm still thinking we would need check for column as part of single 
> > select expression available.
> >     
> >     Can we add test with constant + col? Especially constant first.

Okay. Added the checks.


- Sushil


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/29881/#review68701
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Jan. 20, 2015, 8:37 a.m., Sushil Mohanty wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/29881/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Jan. 20, 2015, 8:37 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for lens and Amareshwari Sriramadasu.
> 
> 
> Bugs: LENS-131
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LENS-131
> 
> 
> Repository: lens
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> When constants get projected the queries by default they were being added to 
> group by. Such queries fail with No Such Column error.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   lens-cube/src/main/java/org/apache/lens/cube/parse/GroupbyResolver.java 
> 2531c49 
>   lens-cube/src/test/java/org/apache/lens/cube/parse/TestCubeRewriter.java 
> cb70b66 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/29881/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Tested with queries with different types of constants projected and rewriter 
> skipping them in group by. Added unit test for the same.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Sushil Mohanty
> 
>

Reply via email to