viirya commented on code in PR #25679: URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/25679#discussion_r4374841101
########## datafusion/sqllogictest/test_files/null_aware_scope_groups.slt: ########## @@ -0,0 +1,110 @@ +# Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one +# or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file +# distributed with this work for additional information +# regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file +# to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the +# "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance +# with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at +# +# http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 +# +# Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, +# software distributed under the License is distributed on an +# "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY +# KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the +# specific language governing permissions and limitations +# under the License. + + Review Comment: The "Check License Header" job fails on this file: hawkeye wants a single blank line after the license header, and there are two here. ```suggestion ``` ########## datafusion/physical-plan/src/joins/hash_join/not_in.rs: ########## @@ -767,7 +757,7 @@ impl<'a> UnknownMarks<'a> { /// A row stays UNKNOWN once it is marked, so pairs that decide a row already /// known to be UNKNOWN are skipped, and the join filter is not evaluated for /// them. Without scope keys this also ends the pairing as soon as every row Review Comment: nit: since `mark` no longer calls `retain_unmarked`, this (and the `UnmarkedPairs` doc at L991–993, "drops the pairs that decide a marked row before it sends them") is now a bit stronger than what happens. A pair of a marked build row can reach the join filter when `lookup_unmarked` skips its check, and the per-probe-row lookup with marks on probe rows doesn't check at all. Both are fine since a pair only sets a mark, as the comment in `lookup_unmarked` says. Maybe something like "...so the pairing drops most pairs that decide a row already known to be UNKNOWN before the join filter is evaluated (see `UnmarkedPairs::lookup_unmarked` for the checks it skips)"? -- 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]
