[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-1581?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16854376#comment-16854376
]
Julian Hyde commented on CALCITE-1581:
--------------------------------------
Also, there are some potential interactions with other SQL clauses.
* Is it legal to use a TF in SELECT with GROUP BY?
* Is it legal to use a TF in SELECT with HAVING?
* Is it legal to use a TF in SELECT with ORDER BY?
* Is it legal to use a TF in SELECT with a JOIN?
* What if the JOIN has UNNEST?
* Is it legal to use a TF in SELECT with other expressions in SELECT?
* Is it legal to use a TF in SELECT inside an IN sub-query?
* Is it legal to use a TF in SELECT with UNION?
For each of these that are legal, I'd like to see a test that runs a query
(thereby demonstrating that sql-to-rel conversion works); for of these that are
illegal, let's document that it's not allowed, and have a validator test.
Also test some combinations of the above (e.g. HAVING with and without GROUP
BY); ORDER BY referencing columns by ordinal or alias.
> UDTF like in hive
> -----------------
>
> Key: CALCITE-1581
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-1581
> Project: Calcite
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Reporter: Xiaoyong Deng
> Assignee: pengzhiwei
> Priority: Major
> Labels: pull-request-available, udtf
> Fix For: 1.20.0
>
> Time Spent: 3h 10m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> Support one row in and multi-column/multi-row out(one-to-many mapping), just
> like udtf in hive.
> The query would like this:
> {code}
> select
> func(c0, c1) as (f0, f1, f2)
> from table_name;
> {code}
> c0 and c1 are 'table_name' columns. f0, f1 and f2 are new generated columns.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
