[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-1584?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15828630#comment-15828630
]
Julian Hyde commented on CALCITE-1584:
--------------------------------------
I don't understand. Maybe you're making some assumptions about what the rule
should do. If so, please state them explicitly.
Also, remember it's OK for a rule to *try* to generate output with particular
field names but there will be times when field names are not preserved. E.g. if
there is an equivalent expression already registered that has different field
names. The Drill folks were relying on rules preserving field names and it
ended badly. RelBuilder, on the other hand, is able to make some guarantees
about field names, but only in its internal structures, not in the actual
RelNode produced.
> ProjectRemoveRule loses field names
> -----------------------------------
>
> Key: CALCITE-1584
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-1584
> Project: Calcite
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: core
> Reporter: Jess Balint
> Assignee: Julian Hyde
> Priority: Minor
>
> the rule doesn't properly identify a child {{Project}} node
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
