-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.3k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Implement serialization for UDWF and UDAF in plan protobuf #6769
Conversation
cc @alamb I am not sure this is good implement?😊 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This looks really good to me -- thank you @parkma99 🤗
row_number_frame, | ||
)); | ||
ctx.register_udaf(dummy_agg); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
THis is great!
Now all we need is a test for the WindowUDF
(aka WindowFunction::WindowUDF
) and I think this PR is ready to go!
@@ -585,16 +585,16 @@ impl TryFrom<&Expr> for protobuf::LogicalExprNode { | |||
) | |||
} | |||
// TODO: Tracked in https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/issues/4584 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Perhaps we can remove the TODO comments as well
Thanks @alamb , I will update the test case lately.😄 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks @parkma99 -- this is looking really close. I have just one more request on the tests 🙏
values: &[ArrayRef], | ||
range: &std::ops::Range<usize>, | ||
) -> Result<ScalarValue> { | ||
// Again, the input argument is an array of floating |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Perhaps we can just use todo!()
here and in the other functions? These should not be called during the logical plan testing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thank you @parkma99 -- looks great
* update * update udwf test * update
Which issue does this PR close?
Closes #4584 #6733
Rationale for this change
What changes are included in this PR?
Are these changes tested?
Are there any user-facing changes?