wuchong commented on a change in pull request #8966:
[FLINK-13074][table-planner-blink] Add PartitionableTableSink bridge logic to
flink&blink …
URL: https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/8966#discussion_r304215764
##########
File path:
flink-table/flink-table-planner-blink/src/main/scala/org/apache/flink/table/plan/rules/physical/batch/BatchExecSinkRule.scala
##########
@@ -35,8 +41,33 @@ class BatchExecSinkRule extends ConverterRule(
def convert(rel: RelNode): RelNode = {
val sinkNode = rel.asInstanceOf[FlinkLogicalSink]
val newTrait = rel.getTraitSet.replace(FlinkConventions.BATCH_PHYSICAL)
- // TODO Take PartitionableSink into consideration after FLINK-11993 is done
- val newInput = RelOptRule.convert(sinkNode.getInput,
FlinkConventions.BATCH_PHYSICAL)
+ var requiredTraitSet =
sinkNode.getInput.getTraitSet.replace(FlinkConventions.BATCH_PHYSICAL)
+ sinkNode.sink match {
+ case partitionSink: PartitionableTableSink
+ if partitionSink.getPartitionFieldNames != null &&
+ partitionSink.getPartitionFieldNames.nonEmpty =>
+ val partitionIndices = partitionSink
+ .getPartitionFieldNames
+ .map(partitionSink.getTableSchema.getFieldNames.indexOf(_))
+ // validate
+ partitionIndices.foreach { idx =>
+ if (idx < 0) {
+ throw new TableException("Partition fields must be in the schema.")
Review comment:
Can we give a more detailed exception? Which partition field is not in the
schema? It would be better to print the table sink name if we can.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
With regards,
Apache Git Services
