[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-19038?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17322970#comment-17322970
]
Flink Jira Bot commented on FLINK-19038:
----------------------------------------
This issue is assigned but has not received an update in 7 days so it has been
labeled "stale-assigned". If you are still working on the issue, please give an
update and remove the label. If you are no longer working on the issue, please
unassign so someone else may work on it. In 7 days the issue will be
automatically unassigned.
> It doesn't support to call Table.limit() continuously
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: FLINK-19038
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-19038
> Project: Flink
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: Table SQL / API
> Affects Versions: 1.12.0
> Reporter: Dian Fu
> Assignee: Nicholas Jiang
> Priority: Major
> Labels: pull-request-available, stale-assigned
> Fix For: 1.14.0
>
>
> For example, table.limit(3).limit(2) will failed with "FETCH is already
> defined."
> {code}
> org.apache.flink.table.api.ValidationException: FETCH is already defined.
> at
> org.apache.flink.table.operations.utils.SortOperationFactory.validateAndGetChildSort(SortOperationFactory.java:125)
> at
> org.apache.flink.table.operations.utils.SortOperationFactory.createLimitWithFetch(SortOperationFactory.java:105)
> at
> org.apache.flink.table.operations.utils.OperationTreeBuilder.limitWithFetch(OperationTreeBuilder.java:418)
> {code}
> However, as we support to call table.limit() without specifying the order, I
> guess this should be a valid usage and should be allowed.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
