Enforce unique names for is_set on first_value and last_value
#18303
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Contributor
|
Looks like need to make some accompanying changes to test in the codebase |
…ould still have at least 1 duplicate field left
Contributor
Author
|
I made the change. |
Contributor
|
Thanks @marc-pydantic |
tobixdev
pushed a commit
to tobixdev/datafusion
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 2, 2025
…pache#18303) ## Which issue does this PR close? - Closes apache#18302 ## Rationale for this change As described in the issue, this is a low-effort QoL fix for now. ## What changes are included in this PR? Uses the existing function for naming fields to replace the hardcoded `"is_set"` with a field-dependent name. Example output: ``` Field { name: "first_value(records_partitioned.trace_id)[first_value]", data_type: Utf8View, nullable: true, dict_id: 0, dict_is_ordered: false, metadata: {}, }, Field { name: "first_value(records_partitioned.trace_id)[first_value_is_set]", data_type: Boolean, nullable: true, dict_id: 0, dict_is_ordered: false, metadata: {}, }, Field { name: "first_value(records_partitioned.value)[first_value]", data_type: Int32, nullable: true, dict_id: 0, dict_is_ordered: false, metadata: {}, }, Field { name: "first_value(records_partitioned.value)[first_value_is_set]", data_type: Boolean, nullable: true, dict_id: 0, dict_is_ordered: false, metadata: {}, }, ``` ## Are these changes tested? No tests have been added, hopefully it should be covered by existing changes. ## Are there any user-facing changes? There should not be any, I assume `is_set` is never user visible.
codetyri0n
pushed a commit
to codetyri0n/datafusion
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 11, 2025
…pache#18303) ## Which issue does this PR close? - Closes apache#18302 ## Rationale for this change As described in the issue, this is a low-effort QoL fix for now. ## What changes are included in this PR? Uses the existing function for naming fields to replace the hardcoded `"is_set"` with a field-dependent name. Example output: ``` Field { name: "first_value(records_partitioned.trace_id)[first_value]", data_type: Utf8View, nullable: true, dict_id: 0, dict_is_ordered: false, metadata: {}, }, Field { name: "first_value(records_partitioned.trace_id)[first_value_is_set]", data_type: Boolean, nullable: true, dict_id: 0, dict_is_ordered: false, metadata: {}, }, Field { name: "first_value(records_partitioned.value)[first_value]", data_type: Int32, nullable: true, dict_id: 0, dict_is_ordered: false, metadata: {}, }, Field { name: "first_value(records_partitioned.value)[first_value_is_set]", data_type: Boolean, nullable: true, dict_id: 0, dict_is_ordered: false, metadata: {}, }, ``` ## Are these changes tested? No tests have been added, hopefully it should be covered by existing changes. ## Are there any user-facing changes? There should not be any, I assume `is_set` is never user visible.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Which issue does this PR close?
FirstValueandLastValueAggregateUDFImplimpls use unique name for data, but not flags #18302Rationale for this change
As described in the issue, this is a low-effort QoL fix for now.
What changes are included in this PR?
Uses the existing function for naming fields to replace the hardcoded
"is_set"with a field-dependent name. Example output:Are these changes tested?
No tests have been added, hopefully it should be covered by existing changes.
Are there any user-facing changes?
There should not be any, I assume
is_setis never user visible.