[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2582?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16772884#comment-16772884
]
Vladimir Sitnikov commented on CALCITE-2582:
--------------------------------------------
{quote}Vladimir: Now I'm puzzled if it is acceptable to transpose Filter and
Project that have different conventions at all.{quote}
I believe I was right, and Calcite should not transpose rels that have
different convention, however that is a completely different story that relates
to a whole bunch of other rules (see CALCITE-2223).
So I think this PR is good to go, except it could use `Unknown.AsFalse` for the
simplification.
[~zabetak], could you please use `unknownas false` and merge the PR?
> FilterProjectTransposeRule does not always simplify the new filter condition
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CALCITE-2582
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2582
> Project: Calcite
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: core
> Affects Versions: 1.17.0
> Reporter: Stamatis Zampetakis
> Assignee: Julian Hyde
> Priority: Minor
> Labels: pull-request-available
>
> After pushing the filter below the project a new condition is going to be
> generated along with a new Filter operator. The new condition is not going to
> be simplified if the filter operator is copied and not created using the
> RelBuilder.
> Thus the resulting plan may contain redundant conditions which can have a
> slight impact on performance. Apart, from that tests verifying the resulting
> (logical/physical) plan may produce indeterministic results if the rule is
> applied with (a different order and in combination with other rules).
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
