beliefer commented on PR #42223: URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/42223#issuecomment-1666404363
> If we want to push this PR for some reason I'm not against it if the above mentioned correctness issue gets fixed (https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/42223#discussion_r1279051263). Fixed. > But honestly, I don't like the idea that we duplicate the code of MergeScalarSubqueries.tryMergePlans() with some > modifications into this new rule just because we don't want to fix agregate merging there. IMO if we all are on the same > page about the discussed solution in https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/42223#issuecomment-1665208447 then we > should update MergeScalarSubqueries.tryMergePlans() (in https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/37630) and use the > updated common merging logic in this PR. I'm also don't like the idea as you said. But it seems the code is different between this PR and https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/37630. Maybe we should advance these two PRs separately until a shared opportunity is discovered, and then reconstruct both. -- 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. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
