mustafasrepo opened a new pull request, #4924:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/pull/4924
# Which issue does this PR close?
<!--
We generally require a GitHub issue to be filed for all bug fixes and
enhancements and this helps us generate change logs for our releases. You can
link an issue to this PR using the GitHub syntax. For example `Closes #123`
indicates that this PR will close issue #123.
-->
Closes #2723
# Rationale for this change
<!--
Why are you proposing this change? If this is already explained clearly in
the issue then this section is not needed.
Explaining clearly why changes are proposed helps reviewers understand your
changes and offer better suggestions for fixes.
-->
Currently there are two very similar implementation for
GroupedHashAggregators. Implementation changes according whether all
aggregators support row format or not. We can decrease code duplication by
combining implementations.
# What changes are included in this PR?
<!--
There is no need to duplicate the description in the issue here but it is
sometimes worth providing a summary of the individual changes in this PR.
-->
This PR groups aggregators supporting row format and not supporting. It
calculates aggregator results for corresponding aggregators. Then writes the
result to the final place in the schema. This has several advantages. It
decreases code duplication. It also can utilize row aggregation even if all
aggregators do not support row aggregation. For instance, consider the query
below
```sql
SELECT MIN(c13) as min1, MIN(c9) as min2, MAX(c13) as max1, MAX(c9) as max2
FROM aggregate_test_100
GROUP BY c1, c2
```
We can calculate result of `MIN(c9)`, `MAX(c9)` with row accumulator, and
`MIN(c13)`, `MAX(c13)` with normal accumulator. After generating results we can
write the result to appropriate index to align with schema. `MIN(c9)`,
`MAX(c9)` will be written to indices 1 and 3, similarly `MIN(c13)`,
`MAX(c13)`will be written to indices 0 and 2 at the final record batch.
# Are these changes tested?
<!--
We typically require tests for all PRs in order to:
1. Prevent the code from being accidentally broken by subsequent changes
2. Serve as another way to document the expected behavior of the code
If tests are not included in your PR, please explain why (for example, are
they covered by existing tests)?
-->
They are covered by existing tests. Since this is basically a refactor.
# Are there any user-facing changes?
<!--
If there are user-facing changes then we may require documentation to be
updated before approving the PR.
-->
<!--
If there are any breaking changes to public APIs, please add the `api
change` label.
-->
--
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]
