Github user gatorsmile commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/18790#discussion_r131533778
--- Diff:
sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/optimizer/Optimizer.scala
---
@@ -872,6 +886,25 @@ object PushDownPredicate extends Rule[LogicalPlan]
with PredicateHelper {
pushDownPredicate(filter, u.child) { predicate =>
u.withNewChildren(Seq(Filter(predicate, u.child)))
}
+
+ case filter @ Filter(condition, watermark: EventTimeWatermark) =>
--- End diff --
Why not changing `EventTimeWatermark ` to `UnaryNode`? Then, we do not need
to write a separate case only for `EventTimeWatermark`. We can reuse the
existing `pushDownPredicate`, right?
We also have the other rules that already consider `UnaryNode`, do you
think it make sense to avoid duplicating the codes for `EventTimeWatermark `
only?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-h...@spark.apache.org
