[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2891?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16784278#comment-16784278
]
Hongze Zhang commented on CALCITE-2891:
---------------------------------------
+1 for the changes.
A non-blocking comment: can we add a more specific test case rather than just
modifying the existing one?
I just run a smoke test within following code on current master branch of
Calcite:
{code:java}
RelNode root =
builder.scan("EMP")
.project(builder.field(0),
builder.field(0),
builder.field(0),
builder.field(0),
builder.field(0),
builder.field(0),
builder.field(0),
builder.field(0),
builder.field(0),
builder.field(0),
builder.field(0),
builder.field(0))
.build();
{code}
It ends up with a very long field name {{EMPNO012345678910}} which looks pretty
bad.
> Alias suggester failed to suggest name based on original name incrementally
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CALCITE-2891
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2891
> Project: Calcite
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: core
> Reporter: Haisheng Yuan
> Priority: Major
> Labels: pull-request-available
> Time Spent: 10m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> in testAliasFilter(), the plan is
> {code:java}
> LogicalFilter(condition=[>($1, $2)])
> LogicalProject($f1=[20], $f12=[10], DEPTNO=[$7])
> LogicalTableScan(table=[[scott, EMP]])
> {code}
> The project alias should be
> {code:java}
> LogicalProject($f1=[20], $f2=[10], DEPTNO=[$7])
> {code}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
