[GitHub] [calcite] zabetak commented on a diff in pull request #3149: [CALCITE-5646] JoinDeriveIsNotNullFilterRule incorrectly handles COAESCE in join condition

["zabetak (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>]

zabetak commented on code in PR #3149:
URL: https://github.com/apache/calcite/pull/3149#discussion_r1172333662


##########
core/src/main/java/org/apache/calcite/rel/rules/JoinDeriveIsNotNullFilterRule.java:
##########
@@ -63,9 +63,11 @@ public JoinDeriveIsNotNullFilterRule(Config config) {
 
     final ImmutableBitSet.Builder notNullableKeys = ImmutableBitSet.builder();
     RelOptUtil.conjunctions(join.getCondition()).forEach(node -> {

Review Comment:
   Is there any benefit in splitting the condition in conjunctions and testing strongness individually for each? Maybe we can remove this decomposition.



-- 
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: commits-unsubscribe@calcite.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org