[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-1661?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15893197#comment-15893197
]
Julian Hyde edited comment on CALCITE-1661 at 3/2/17 11:05 PM:
---------------------------------------------------------------
Re-opening. This change breaks DruidAdapterIT:
* All tests in DruidAdapterIT pass against
[a269a2b|http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/calcite/commit/a269a2b],
CALCITE-1623.
* As of [49888a6|http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/calcite/commit/49888a6]
there is one failure, DruidAdapterIT.testFilterTimestamp. [~nishantbangarwa]
mentioned this already. I'll look into it. I suspect that it is a plan
improvement due to CALCITE-1601.
* The next change,
[0372d23|http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/calcite/commit/0372d23], there
are 25 failures. The test takes much longer than usual (13 minutes), and it
seems that plans have changed, to do much of the aggregation in Calcite rather
than in Druid.
was (Author: julianhyde):
Re-opening. This change breaks DruidAdapterIT:
* All tests in DruidAdapterIT pass against
[a269a2b|http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/calcite/commit/a269a2b],
CALCITE-1623.
* As of [49888a6|http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/calcite/commit/49888a6]
there is one failure, DruidAdapterIT.testFilterTimestamp. [~nishantbangarwa]
mentioned this already. I'll look into it. I suspect that it is a plan
improvement due to CALCITE-1601.
* The next change,
[0372d23|http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/calcite/commit/0372d23], there
are more than 16 failures. The test takes much longer than usual (8 minutes so
far), and it seems that plans have changed, to do much of the aggregation in
Calcite rather than in Druid.
> Support aggregation functions on DECIMAL in DruidAdapter
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CALCITE-1661
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-1661
> Project: Calcite
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: druid
> Affects Versions: 1.12.0
> Reporter: Jesus Camacho Rodriguez
> Assignee: Jesus Camacho Rodriguez
> Fix For: 1.12.0
>
>
> Currently, whether to use fractional or integer aggregations is based on
> following code (L699 in DruidQuery.java).
> {code}
> final boolean b = aggCall.getType().getSqlTypeName() == SqlTypeName.DOUBLE;
> {code}
> Since Hive might use other fractional types for the aggregation, we might end
> up using the wrong type of aggregation in Druid. We could extend the check as
> follows:
> {code}
> final boolean b =
> SqlTypeName.FRACTIONAL_TYPES.contains(aggCall.getType().getSqlTypeName());
> {code}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
