[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DRILL-6154?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Arina Ielchiieva updated DRILL-6154:
------------------------------------
Labels: ready-to-commit (was: )
> NaN, Infinity issues
> --------------------
>
> Key: DRILL-6154
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DRILL-6154
> Project: Apache Drill
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 1.13.0
> Reporter: Volodymyr Tkach
> Assignee: Volodymyr Tkach
> Priority: Major
> Labels: ready-to-commit
> Fix For: 1.13.0
>
>
> 1.Issue
> *AFFECTED_VERSION:* drill-1.13.0-SNAPSHOT
> *AFFECTED_FUNCTIONS:*
> - *sqrt*
> - *trunc*
> *ISSUE_DESCRIPTION:* According to DRILL-5919/ new json number literals were
> added: *NaN, Infinity, -Infinity*. The new data types must be processed
> properly by existing functions. There are a few issues:
> *1. SQRT function*. Run the following test query:
> {code:java}
> select sqrt(Nan) NaN, sqrt(Positive_Infinity) POS_INF,
> sqrt(Negative_Infinity) NEG_INF from dfs.tmp.`PN_Inf_NaN.json`{code}
>
> - EXPECTED_RESULT: it was expected to get the following result: _NaN,
> Infinity, NaN_ (expected result is based on java Math.sqrt() method)
> - ACTUAL_RESULT: the test query returned: _NaN, Infinity, Infinity_
> *2. TRUNC function*. According to DRILL docs
> ([https://drill.apache.org/docs/math-and-trig/):] _TRUNC(x, y) : Truncates x
> to y decimal places. *Specifying y is optional. Default is 1*_. So, the
> function must work properly without specifying *y*
> However an error message appears. Run test_query:
> {code:java}
> select trunc(Nan) NaN, trunc(Positive_Infinity) POS_INF,
> trunc(Negative_Infinity) NEG_INF from dfs.tmp.`PN_Inf_NaN.json`{code}
> - EXPECTED_RESULT: it was expected to get the following result *NaN, NaN,
> NaN*
> - ACTUAL_RESULT: it appears the following error message: *Query Failed: An
> Error Occurred org.apache.drill.common.exceptions.UserRemoteException: SYSTEM
> ERROR: NumberFormatException Fragment 0:0 [Error Id:
> 95e01fee-7433-4b0b-b913-32358b4a8f55 on node1:31010]*
> Please investigate and fix, test file attached PN_Inf_NaN.json
> 2. Issue
> *AFFECTED_VERSION:* drill-1.13.0-SNAPSHOT
> *AFFECTED_FUNCTIONALITY:* INNER JOIN
> *ISSUE_DESCRIPTION:* There were added new Json data types in DRILL-5919:
> *NaN, Infinity, -Infinity*.
> During testing activities, it was detected a bit strange behavior of INNER
> JOIN operator - different query results in almost the same queries.
> *Query1*
> {code:java}
> select distinct t.name, tt.name from dfs.tmp.`ObjsX.json` t inner join
> dfs.tmp.`ObjsX.json` tt on t.attr4 = tt.attr4 {code}
> *Query2*
> {code:java}
> select distinct t.name from dfs.tmp.`ObjsX.json` t inner join
> dfs.tmp.`ObjsX.json` tt on t.attr4 = tt.attr4 {code}
> *Query1* differs from *Query2* by 1 columns only:
> - In *Query1* - 2 columns are selected - t.name, tt.name
> - In *Query2* - 1 column is selected - t.name
> However *Query1*/*Query2* return completely different results:
> - *Query1* returns
> {code:java}
> name name0
> object2 object2
> object2 object3
> object2 object4
> object3 object2
> object3 object3
> object3 object4
> object4 object2
> object4 object3
> object4 object4
> {code}
> This result seems to be correct.
> - *Query2* returns _*No result found*_, not expected:
> *EXPECTED_RESULT:*
> {code:java}
> name
> object2
> object3
> object4
> {code}
> *ACTUAL_RESULT:(*
> {code:java}
> No result found{code}
> *NB!:* the issue appears only if tables are _*JOINed by a column which
> contains newly-added data types (NaN, Infinity, -Infinity)*_. The issue is
> not reproducible is a user is JOINing tables by a column containing other
> data types
> 3. Issue
> *AFFECTED_VERSION:* drill-1.13.0-SNAPSHOT
> *AFFECTED_FUNCTIONALITY:* ORDER BY, DESC
> *THIS ISSUE REFERS TO:DRILL-5919*
> *ISSUE_DESCRIPTION:* 'ORDER BY/DESC' clause behaves in different ways when
> sorting columns containing NaN values. In one case it considers NaN to be the
> largest value, in another - the smallest one.
> *Steps:*
> - Select from the attached test file (orderBy.json, attached)
> {code:java}
> SELECT name, attr4 from dfs.tmp.`orderBy.json` order by name, attr4{code}
> - Check the attached screen shot (orderByIssue.jpg):
> *EXPECTED_RESULT:* It was expected the 'ORDER BY' clause to sort attr4
> columns data in the same way (most probably NaN should be the largest, see
> *NB*)
> *ACTUAL_RESULT:* attr4 column's values were sorted in different ways: for
> 'obj1'/'obj3' NaN is the largest, for 'obj2'/'obj4' NaN is the smallest.
> *NB:* Postgres as well as Java's sorting (Collection.sort() / Arrays.sort()
> methods) treats NaN as the largest value
> 4. Issue
> *AFFECTED_VERSION:* drill-1.13.0-SNAPSHOT
> *AFFECTED_FUNCTIONALITY:* max(column_name), min(column_name),
> *ISSUE_DESCRIPTION:* min/max aggregation functions return the same result if
> the selected column contains NaN value.
> {code:java}
> SELECT name, max(attr4), min(attr4) from dfs.tmp.`minMax.json` group by
> name{code}
> Result
> {code:java}
> name Min Max
> obj1 NaN NaN
> obj2 NaN NaN
> obj3 NaN NaN
> obj4 NaN NaN
> {code}
> As for me, this logic should be revised, current behavior is a bit confusing:
> - Postgres considers NaN to be the largest value, so {{MAX(col_withNaN)}}
> will return NaN, {{MIN(col_withNaN)}} - will return other value, so DRILL's
> min/max logic can be adjusted to the Postgres' one, see postgres.jpg
> - Or NAN can behave like NULL - DRILL's MIN/MAX functions ignore NULLs
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
