Re: [PR] support OR operator in binary `evaluate_bounds` [datafusion]

2025-05-02 Thread via GitHub
berkaysynnada commented on code in PR #15716: URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/15716#discussion_r2071501942 ## datafusion/physical-expr/src/intervals/cp_solver.rs: ## @@ -645,6 +645,17 @@ impl ExprIntervalGraph { .map(|child| self.graph[*child].int

Re: [PR] support OR operator in binary `evaluate_bounds` [datafusion]

2025-04-30 Thread via GitHub
davidhewitt commented on PR #15716: URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/15716#issuecomment-2841940052 Thanks! -- 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

Re: [PR] support OR operator in binary `evaluate_bounds` [datafusion]

2025-04-30 Thread via GitHub
alamb merged PR #15716: URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/15716 -- 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: github-unsubscr...@datafusi

Re: [PR] support OR operator in binary `evaluate_bounds` [datafusion]

2025-04-30 Thread via GitHub
alamb commented on code in PR #15716: URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/15716#discussion_r2068480882 ## datafusion/physical-expr/src/intervals/cp_solver.rs: ## @@ -645,6 +645,17 @@ impl ExprIntervalGraph { .map(|child| self.graph[*child].interval())

Re: [PR] support OR operator in binary `evaluate_bounds` [datafusion]

2025-04-30 Thread via GitHub
alamb commented on PR #15716: URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/15716#issuecomment-2841692463 Thanks @davidhewitt and @berkaysynnada -- 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

Re: [PR] support OR operator in binary `evaluate_bounds` [datafusion]

2025-04-29 Thread via GitHub
davidhewitt commented on code in PR #15716: URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/15716#discussion_r2067195794 ## datafusion/physical-expr/src/intervals/cp_solver.rs: ## @@ -645,6 +645,17 @@ impl ExprIntervalGraph { .map(|child| self.graph[*child].inter

Re: [PR] support OR operator in binary `evaluate_bounds` [datafusion]

2025-04-17 Thread via GitHub
davidhewitt commented on PR #15716: URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/15716#issuecomment-2814011078 Thanks, I will probably get around to fixing this up on Tuesday 👍 -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub

Re: [PR] support OR operator in binary `evaluate_bounds` [datafusion]

2025-04-17 Thread via GitHub
berkaysynnada commented on PR #15716: URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/15716#issuecomment-2813177013 Failing tests should be fixed after taking a merge from main -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub an

Re: [PR] support OR operator in binary `evaluate_bounds` [datafusion]

2025-04-17 Thread via GitHub
berkaysynnada commented on PR #15716: URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/15716#issuecomment-2812071358 Thank you @davidhewitt. I will review this today -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the UR

Re: [PR] support OR operator in binary `evaluate_bounds` [datafusion]

2025-04-15 Thread via GitHub
davidhewitt commented on PR #15716: URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/15716#issuecomment-2805310977 The failing tests were added in #14189 and #14735, both which talk about supporting OR as a future possibility. Ping @berkaysynnada as the reviewer / approver of both those

[PR] support OR operator in binary `evaluate_bounds` [datafusion]

2025-04-15 Thread via GitHub
davidhewitt opened a new pull request, #15716: URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/15716 ## Which issue does this PR close? - Closes #15715 . ## Rationale for this change Seems like this should have worked as per the commentary in the issue. ## What chan