berkaysynnada opened a new pull request, #10088:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/pull/10088
## 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 #.
## 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.
-->
During projection, 3 cases found where the input field names do not match
with the projection expressions:
1) COUNT(1) expressions appear as COUNT(*) in the input field.
2) Aggregate function names do not include ORDER BY clause in their field
name, but the projections expect them with ORDER BY clause.
3) While we are reverting first-last value functions, we forgot to convert
also ORDER BY clause.
These are not bugs since the projection does not check the names during
execution. However, when writing some optimizer rules, projections may be added
by looking at the input schema. That inconsistencies cause some errors then.
## 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.
-->
1) COUNT() expressions are renamed as the way that they appear in the
projection.
2) ScalarFunction, WindowFunction and AggregateFunction's names contain the
ORDER BY clause now.
3) First-Last value functions' order are also reverted now.
4) While creating the ProjectionMapping, we check the naming of expression
and fields.
## 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)?
-->
One test added for the COUNT case, existing tests with new versions cover
the other cases.
## 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]
