alamb commented on code in PR #17645:
URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/17645#discussion_r2380049014
##########
datafusion/core/tests/dataframe/mod.rs:
##########
@@ -1863,7 +1863,7 @@ async fn with_column_renamed_join() -> Result<()> {
assert_snapshot!(
df_renamed.logical_plan(),
@r"
- Projection: t1.c1 AS AAA, t1.c2, t1.c3, t2.c1, t2.c2, t2.c3
+ Projection: t1.c1 AS t1.AAA, t1.c2, t1.c3, t2.c1, t2.c2, t2.c3
Review Comment:
This doesn't seem right to me -- the alias shouldn't have a qualifier on it,
should it? `AAA` doesn't come from the `t1` relation, it is created in the
outer query
##########
datafusion/core/tests/sql/explain_analyze.rs:
##########
@@ -182,9 +182,9 @@ async fn csv_explain_plans() {
actual,
@r"
Explain [plan_type:Utf8, plan:Utf8]
- Projection: aggregate_test_100.c1 [c1:Utf8View]
- Filter: aggregate_test_100.c2 > Int64(10) [c1:Utf8View, c2:Int8,
c3:Int16, c4:Int16, c5:Int32, c6:Int64, c7:Int16, c8:Int32, c9:UInt32,
c10:UInt64, c11:Float32, c12:Float64, c13:Utf8View]
- TableScan: aggregate_test_100 [c1:Utf8View, c2:Int8, c3:Int16,
c4:Int16, c5:Int32, c6:Int64, c7:Int16, c8:Int32, c9:UInt32, c10:UInt64,
c11:Float32, c12:Float64, c13:Utf8View]
+ Projection: aggregate_test_100.c1 [aggregate_test_100.c1:Utf8View]
+ Filter: aggregate_test_100.c2 > Int64(10)
[aggregate_test_100.c1:Utf8View, aggregate_test_100.c2:Int8,
aggregate_test_100.c3:Int16, aggregate_test_100.c4:Int16,
aggregate_test_100.c5:Int32, aggregate_test_100.c6:Int64,
aggregate_test_100.c7:Int16, aggregate_test_100.c8:Int32,
aggregate_test_100.c9:UInt32, aggregate_test_100.c10:UInt64,
aggregate_test_100.c11:Float32, aggregate_test_100.c12:Float64,
aggregate_test_100.c13:Utf8View]
Review Comment:
this is a good example of a plan which is much less readable after this
change in my mind
##########
datafusion/core/tests/dataframe/mod.rs:
##########
@@ -3606,12 +3606,12 @@ async fn join_with_alias_filter() -> Result<()> {
let actual = formatted.trim();
assert_snapshot!(
actual,
- @r###"
- Projection: t1.a, t2.a, t1.b, t1.c, t2.b, t2.c [a:UInt32, a:UInt32,
b:Utf8, c:Int32, b:Utf8, c:Int32]
- Inner Join: t1.a + UInt32(3) = t2.a + UInt32(1) [a:UInt32, b:Utf8,
c:Int32, a:UInt32, b:Utf8, c:Int32]
- TableScan: t1 projection=[a, b, c] [a:UInt32, b:Utf8, c:Int32]
- TableScan: t2 projection=[a, b, c] [a:UInt32, b:Utf8, c:Int32]
- "###
+ @r"
+ Projection: t1.a, t2.a, t1.b, t1.c, t2.b, t2.c [t1.a:UInt32, t2.a:UInt32,
t1.b:Utf8, t1.c:Int32, t2.b:Utf8, t2.c:Int32]
Review Comment:
I think it is an improvement for the `Projection` and `Inner Join` here to
have the qualifiers on them -- that makes them less ambiguous when there are
potentially multiple relations
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
