Blizzara commented on issue #10815: URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/issues/10815#issuecomment-2160007383
> Given that names don't matter in Substrait (the final names are provided) is the problem solvable within the Substrait consumer for Datafusion? As discussed on the Substrait ticket, yes it can be solved, but not in a nice way. > Shouldn't the consumer be able to rename the columns to whatever it wants? It can, however given the user has named the columns/tables in one way in the original plan, it can be quite confusing to the user if the columns/tables are named much differently in the actually executed plan. > Stepping further back I wonder if the check is needed at all here -- is it trying to prevent extra work or is it trying to prevent confusion on its part later on? It may be designed for the case where the fields are named the same but are from different sources which isn't happening here. Perhaps the check needs to be made more precise? This plan results in a cross join, so the fields do refer to different sources, or same table but different sides of the join, so they are different columns. -- 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: github-unsubscr...@datafusion.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: github-unsubscr...@datafusion.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: github-h...@datafusion.apache.org
