[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-4623?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Stamatis Zampetakis resolved CALCITE-4623.
------------------------------------------
Resolution: Fixed
Fixed in
[5e1ce04ec007d4af78c8abffc3965fea815503f4|https://github.com/apache/calcite/commit/5e1ce04ec007d4af78c8abffc3965fea815503f4].
Thanks for the review [~rubenql],[~nobigo]!
> SemiJoinRule should not match SEMI join
> ---------------------------------------
>
> Key: CALCITE-4623
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-4623
> Project: Calcite
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: core
> Affects Versions: 1.26.0
> Reporter: Ruben Q L
> Assignee: Stamatis Zampetakis
> Priority: Major
> Labels: pull-request-available
> Fix For: 1.28.0
>
> Time Spent: 0.5h
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> Issue pointed out by [~zabetak] during the review of CALCITE-4621.
> Currently, SemiJoinRule (both {{CoreRules.JOIN_TO_SEMI_JOIN}} and
> {{CoreRules.PROJECT_TO_SEMI_JOIN}}) matches INNER, LEFT and SEMI join. This
> last join type seems a bit bizarre (why matching a SEMI join if the purpose
> of this rule is precisely generating one?).
> It seems that SEMI was introduced in the rule by the "big join design
> refactoring" (see CALCITE-2969 and
> [4809393|https://github.com/apache/calcite/commit/48093937ae4db179884d1111fa9d12e978e57e1f]).
> The purpose of this ticket is to confirm whether or not processing SEMI in
> SemiJoinRule makes sense (and if not, remove it).
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
