tokoko commented on code in PR #13127:
URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/13127#discussion_r1825117522
##########
datafusion/substrait/src/logical_plan/consumer.rs:
##########
@@ -1053,15 +1077,123 @@ pub async fn from_substrait_rel(
return not_impl_err!("Unsupported exchange kind:
{exchange_kind:?}");
}
};
- Ok(LogicalPlan::Repartition(Repartition {
+ let plan = LogicalPlan::Repartition(Repartition {
input,
partitioning_scheme,
- }))
+ });
+ apply_emit_kind(exchange.common.as_ref(), plan)
}
_ => not_impl_err!("Unsupported RelType: {:?}", rel.rel_type),
}
}
+fn retrieve_emit_kind(rel_common: Option<&RelCommon>) -> EmitKind {
+ // the default EmitKind is Direct if it is not set explicitly
+ let default = EmitKind::Direct(rel_common::Direct {});
+ rel_common
+ .and_then(|rc| rc.emit_kind.as_ref())
+ .map_or(default, |ek| ek.clone())
+}
+
+fn contains_volatile_expr(proj: &Projection) -> Result<bool> {
Review Comment:
okay, another one :laughing: I have a slight preference for checking for
uniqueness rather than volatility. Volatility probably does take care of
correctness issues, but what if it's a fairly complicated subquery expression
that's being repeated? Uniqueness check feels safer to me as it definitely
won't lead to performance issues on some strange edge cases. wdyt?
--
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]
