[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2948?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16828850#comment-16828850
]
Haisheng Yuan commented on CALCITE-2948:
----------------------------------------
I think you have missed our last conversation that transforming expressions is
not the way to go, because the solution you proposed doesn't work for a = $b%s,
a=func($b), a > $b etc..
After SubQueryRemoveRule, I am expecting the following plan:
{code:java}
select * from R where r1 in (select s1 from S where r2 = s2+1)
Correlate
|-- R
+--Filter (r1 = s1 and r2 = s2+1)
+-- S
{code}
Check the method SubQueryRemoveRule.rewriteIn.
BTW, the plan of testInSubqueryWithNonEqualCondition4 in your latest patch is
wrong.
> Complicated logical plan generated for in subquery with non-equi condition
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CALCITE-2948
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-2948
> Project: Calcite
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: core
> Reporter: Haisheng Yuan
> Assignee: Danny Chan
> Priority: Major
> Labels: pull-request-available, sub-query
> Time Spent: 1.5h
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> Repro:
> Add the following test to SqlToRelConverterTest.java.
> {code:java}
> @Test public void testSubQueryIN() {
> final String sql = "select deptno\n"
> + "from EMP e\n"
> + "where deptno in (select deptno\n"
> + "from EMP where empno=e.empno+1)";
> sql(sql).ok();
> }
> {code}
> Plan:
> {code:java}
> LogicalProject(DEPTNO=[$7])
> LogicalJoin(condition=[AND(=($0, $10), =($7, $9))], joinType=[inner])
> LogicalTableScan(table=[[CATALOG, SALES, EMP]])
> LogicalAggregate(group=[{0, 1}])
> LogicalProject(DEPTNO=[$7], EMPNO0=[$9])
> LogicalJoin(condition=[=($0, +($9, 1))], joinType=[inner])
> LogicalTableScan(table=[[CATALOG, SALES, EMP]])
> LogicalProject(EMPNO=[$0])
> LogicalTableScan(table=[[CATALOG, SALES, EMP]])
> {code}
> One join would suffice.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
