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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
add on and ignoring clauses in binOpExpr #4391
add on and ignoring clauses in binOpExpr #4391
Changes from all commits
11573cc
0035ee3
73bcb19
8f2e0b5
48314f3
8064e3d
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
Nit: It'd be great to have a sharding test to ensure this
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.
@owen-d
We cannot use
*e.opts.VectorMatching != zero
to check whether VectorMatching struct is empty, it is becauseVectorMatching
hasInclude []string
, it will causeInvalid operation: *e.opts.VectorMatching != zero (the operator != is not defined on VectorMatching)
.I thought
e.opts != nil && e.opts.VectorMatching != nil
should be good enough sincee.opts.VectorMatching
is a pointer? Am I missing anything? Any thoughts, please advise! Thanks!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.
added sharding test - 0ab8264 and https://github.com/garrettlish/loki/blob/onOrIgnoring/pkg/logql/shardmapper_test.go#L984, could you please help review it again? Thanks!
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.
Ah bummer, slice comparison 😭 . Anyway,
e.opts != nil && e.opts.VectorMatching != nil
should be fine. I was mainly protecting us from preventing sharding when the expression usedwithout ()
, which is the same as not specifyingwithout
at all. I don't think that should block this PR though. Great work, LGTM!