You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to github@arrow.apache.org by "viirya (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org> on 2023/12/03 22:16:27 UTC
[PR] fix: RANGE frame can be regularized to ROWS frame only if empty ORDER BY clause [arrow-datafusion]
viirya opened a new pull request, #8410:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/pull/8410
## Which issue does this PR close?
<!--
We generally require a GitHub issue to be filed for all bug fixes and enhancements and this helps us generate change logs for our releases. You can link an issue to this PR using the GitHub syntax. For example `Closes #123` indicates that this PR will close issue #123.
-->
Closes #.
## Rationale for this change
<!--
Why are you proposing this change? If this is already explained clearly in the issue then this section is not needed.
Explaining clearly why changes are proposed helps reviewers understand your changes and offer better suggestions for fixes.
-->
We have regularized RANGE window frame to ROWS frame if ORDER BY clause is empty under special cases (based on the comment), but the code actually ignores non-empty ORDER BY clause which implicitly allows more than one ORDER BY columns.
## What changes are included in this PR?
<!--
There is no need to duplicate the description in the issue here but it is sometimes worth providing a summary of the individual changes in this PR.
-->
Disallowing multiple ORDER BY columns for RANGE window frame.
## Are these changes tested?
<!--
We typically require tests for all PRs in order to:
1. Prevent the code from being accidentally broken by subsequent changes
2. Serve as another way to document the expected behavior of the code
If tests are not included in your PR, please explain why (for example, are they covered by existing tests)?
-->
Added tests to `sqllogictest`.
## Are there any user-facing changes?
<!--
If there are user-facing changes then we may require documentation to be updated before approving the PR.
-->
<!--
If there are any breaking changes to public APIs, please add the `api change` label.
-->
--
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-unsubscribe@arrow.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] fix: RANGE frame can be regularized to ROWS frame only if empty ORDER BY clause [arrow-datafusion]
Posted by "viirya (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
viirya commented on code in PR #8410:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/pull/8410#discussion_r1413223403
##########
datafusion/sqllogictest/test_files/window.slt:
##########
@@ -1080,7 +1080,7 @@ SELECT
794 95 95
#fn test_window_range_equivalent_frames
-query IIIIIII
+query error DataFusion error: Error during planning: RANGE requires exactly one ORDER BY column
SELECT
c9,
COUNT(*) OVER(ORDER BY c9, c1 RANGE BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND CURRENT ROW) AS cnt1,
Review Comment:
I add a new test query which removes the window functions with 2 column ORDER BY clause.
--
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-unsubscribe@arrow.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] fix: RANGE frame can be regularized to ROWS frame only if empty ORDER BY clause [arrow-datafusion]
Posted by "viirya (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
viirya commented on code in PR #8410:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/pull/8410#discussion_r1413357621
##########
datafusion/expr/src/window_frame.rs:
##########
@@ -148,18 +148,20 @@ impl WindowFrame {
pub fn regularize(mut frame: WindowFrame, order_bys: usize) -> Result<WindowFrame> {
if frame.units == WindowFrameUnits::Range && order_bys != 1 {
// Normally, RANGE frames require an ORDER BY clause with exactly one
- // column. However, an ORDER BY clause may be absent in two edge cases.
+ // column. However, an ORDER BY clause may be absent in two edge cases:
+ // 1. start bound is UNBOUNDED or CURRENT ROW
+ // 2. end bound is CURRENT ROW or UNBOUNDED.
+ // In these cases, we regularize the RANGE frame to be equivalent to a ROWS
+ // frame with the UNBOUNDED bounds.
Review Comment:
Hmm, actually Postgres behavior allows empty ORDER BY clause, one column or multiple column ORDER BY clause with RANGE frame if start bound/end bound is UNBOUNDED or CURRENT ROW.
--
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-unsubscribe@arrow.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] fix: RANGE frame can be regularized to ROWS frame only if empty ORDER BY clause [arrow-datafusion]
Posted by "viirya (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
viirya commented on code in PR #8410:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/pull/8410#discussion_r1413218114
##########
datafusion/sqllogictest/test_files/window.slt:
##########
@@ -1080,7 +1080,7 @@ SELECT
794 95 95
#fn test_window_range_equivalent_frames
-query IIIIIII
+query error DataFusion error: Error during planning: RANGE requires exactly one ORDER BY column
SELECT
c9,
COUNT(*) OVER(ORDER BY c9, c1 RANGE BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND CURRENT ROW) AS cnt1,
Review Comment:
This query has 2 column ORDER BY clause with RANGE frame, which should be disallowed.
--
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-unsubscribe@arrow.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] fix: RANGE frame can be regularized to ROWS frame only if empty ORDER BY clause [arrow-datafusion]
Posted by "viirya (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
viirya commented on code in PR #8410:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/pull/8410#discussion_r1413396097
##########
datafusion/expr/src/window_frame.rs:
##########
@@ -148,12 +148,22 @@ impl WindowFrame {
pub fn regularize(mut frame: WindowFrame, order_bys: usize) -> Result<WindowFrame> {
if frame.units == WindowFrameUnits::Range && order_bys != 1 {
// Normally, RANGE frames require an ORDER BY clause with exactly one
- // column. However, an ORDER BY clause may be absent in two edge cases.
+ // column. However, an ORDER BY clause may be absent or present but with
+ // more than one column in two edge cases:
+ // 1. start bound is UNBOUNDED or CURRENT ROW
+ // 2. end bound is CURRENT ROW or UNBOUNDED.
+ // In these cases, we regularize the RANGE frame to be equivalent to a ROWS
+ // frame with the UNBOUNDED bounds.
+ // Note that this follows Postgres behavior.
if (frame.start_bound.is_unbounded()
|| frame.start_bound == WindowFrameBound::CurrentRow)
&& (frame.end_bound == WindowFrameBound::CurrentRow
|| frame.end_bound.is_unbounded())
{
+ // If an ORDER BY clause is absent, the frame is equivalent to a ROWS
+ // frame with the UNBOUNDED bounds.
+ // If an ORDER BY clause is present but has more than one column, the
+ // frame is unchanged.
Review Comment:
Actually, based on Postgres behavior, it doesn't change the RANGE frame to ROWS frame (see the added tests in sqllogictest which return different results than Postgres). Without `ORDER BY`, Postgres treats all rows of the partition as peers of the current row.
--
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-unsubscribe@arrow.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Update code comment for the cases of regularized RANGE frame and add tests for ORDER BY cases with RANGE frame [arrow-datafusion]
Posted by "viirya (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
viirya commented on PR #8410:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/pull/8410#issuecomment-1839713617
Thanks @jackwener
--
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-unsubscribe@arrow.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] fix: RANGE frame can be regularized to ROWS frame only if empty ORDER BY clause [arrow-datafusion]
Posted by "viirya (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
viirya commented on code in PR #8410:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/pull/8410#discussion_r1413223403
##########
datafusion/sqllogictest/test_files/window.slt:
##########
@@ -1080,7 +1080,7 @@ SELECT
794 95 95
#fn test_window_range_equivalent_frames
-query IIIIIII
+query error DataFusion error: Error during planning: RANGE requires exactly one ORDER BY column
SELECT
c9,
COUNT(*) OVER(ORDER BY c9, c1 RANGE BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND CURRENT ROW) AS cnt1,
Review Comment:
I add another one below which removes the window functions with 2 column ORDER BY clause.
##########
datafusion/sqllogictest/test_files/window.slt:
##########
@@ -1080,7 +1080,7 @@ SELECT
794 95 95
#fn test_window_range_equivalent_frames
-query IIIIIII
+query error DataFusion error: Error during planning: RANGE requires exactly one ORDER BY column
SELECT
c9,
COUNT(*) OVER(ORDER BY c9, c1 RANGE BETWEEN CURRENT ROW AND CURRENT ROW) AS cnt1,
Review Comment:
I add another one which removes the window functions with 2 column ORDER BY clause.
--
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-unsubscribe@arrow.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] fix: RANGE frame can be regularized to ROWS frame only if empty ORDER BY clause [arrow-datafusion]
Posted by "viirya (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
viirya commented on code in PR #8410:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/pull/8410#discussion_r1413246702
##########
datafusion/expr/src/window_frame.rs:
##########
@@ -148,18 +148,20 @@ impl WindowFrame {
pub fn regularize(mut frame: WindowFrame, order_bys: usize) -> Result<WindowFrame> {
if frame.units == WindowFrameUnits::Range && order_bys != 1 {
// Normally, RANGE frames require an ORDER BY clause with exactly one
- // column. However, an ORDER BY clause may be absent in two edge cases.
+ // column. However, an ORDER BY clause may be absent in two edge cases:
+ // 1. start bound is UNBOUNDED or CURRENT ROW
+ // 2. end bound is CURRENT ROW or UNBOUNDED.
+ // In these cases, we regularize the RANGE frame to be equivalent to a ROWS
+ // frame with the UNBOUNDED bounds.
Review Comment:
So DataFusion is following Postgres behavior on this.
```
postgres=# select a, rank() over (partition by a RANGE between 1 PRECEDING AND 2 FOLLOWING) rnk from (select 1 a) q;
ERROR: RANGE with offset PRECEDING/FOLLOWING requires exactly one ORDER BY column
LINE 1: select a, rank() over (partition by a RANGE between 1 PRECED...
^
postgres=# select a, rank() over (partition by a RANGE between UNBOUNDED PRECEDING AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING) rnk from (select 1 a) q;
a | rnk
---+-----
1 | 1
(1 row)
```
--
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-unsubscribe@arrow.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Update code comment for the cases of regularized RANGE frame and add tests for ORDER BY cases with RANGE frame [arrow-datafusion]
Posted by "viirya (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
viirya commented on code in PR #8410:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/pull/8410#discussion_r1413396097
##########
datafusion/expr/src/window_frame.rs:
##########
@@ -148,12 +148,22 @@ impl WindowFrame {
pub fn regularize(mut frame: WindowFrame, order_bys: usize) -> Result<WindowFrame> {
if frame.units == WindowFrameUnits::Range && order_bys != 1 {
// Normally, RANGE frames require an ORDER BY clause with exactly one
- // column. However, an ORDER BY clause may be absent in two edge cases.
+ // column. However, an ORDER BY clause may be absent or present but with
+ // more than one column in two edge cases:
+ // 1. start bound is UNBOUNDED or CURRENT ROW
+ // 2. end bound is CURRENT ROW or UNBOUNDED.
+ // In these cases, we regularize the RANGE frame to be equivalent to a ROWS
+ // frame with the UNBOUNDED bounds.
+ // Note that this follows Postgres behavior.
if (frame.start_bound.is_unbounded()
|| frame.start_bound == WindowFrameBound::CurrentRow)
&& (frame.end_bound == WindowFrameBound::CurrentRow
|| frame.end_bound.is_unbounded())
{
+ // If an ORDER BY clause is absent, the frame is equivalent to a ROWS
+ // frame with the UNBOUNDED bounds.
+ // If an ORDER BY clause is present but has more than one column, the
+ // frame is unchanged.
Review Comment:
Actually, based on Postgres behavior, it doesn't change the RANGE frame to ROWS frame (see the added tests in sqllogictest which return different results than Postgres). Based on Postgres doc, without `ORDER BY`, Postgres treats all rows of the partition as peers of the current row (https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/sql-expressions.html#SYNTAX-WINDOW-FUNCTIONS).
##########
datafusion/expr/src/window_frame.rs:
##########
@@ -148,12 +148,22 @@ impl WindowFrame {
pub fn regularize(mut frame: WindowFrame, order_bys: usize) -> Result<WindowFrame> {
if frame.units == WindowFrameUnits::Range && order_bys != 1 {
// Normally, RANGE frames require an ORDER BY clause with exactly one
- // column. However, an ORDER BY clause may be absent in two edge cases.
+ // column. However, an ORDER BY clause may be absent or present but with
+ // more than one column in two edge cases:
+ // 1. start bound is UNBOUNDED or CURRENT ROW
+ // 2. end bound is CURRENT ROW or UNBOUNDED.
+ // In these cases, we regularize the RANGE frame to be equivalent to a ROWS
+ // frame with the UNBOUNDED bounds.
+ // Note that this follows Postgres behavior.
if (frame.start_bound.is_unbounded()
|| frame.start_bound == WindowFrameBound::CurrentRow)
&& (frame.end_bound == WindowFrameBound::CurrentRow
|| frame.end_bound.is_unbounded())
{
+ // If an ORDER BY clause is absent, the frame is equivalent to a ROWS
+ // frame with the UNBOUNDED bounds.
+ // If an ORDER BY clause is present but has more than one column, the
+ // frame is unchanged.
Review Comment:
Actually, based on Postgres behavior, it doesn't change the RANGE frame to ROWS frame (see the added tests in sqllogictest which return different results than Postgres).
Based on Postgres doc, without `ORDER BY`, Postgres treats all rows of the partition as peers of the current row (https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/sql-expressions.html#SYNTAX-WINDOW-FUNCTIONS).
--
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-unsubscribe@arrow.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Update code comment for the cases of regularized RANGE frame and add tests for ORDER BY cases with RANGE frame [arrow-datafusion]
Posted by "viirya (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
viirya commented on code in PR #8410:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/pull/8410#discussion_r1413412856
##########
datafusion/sqllogictest/test_files/window.slt:
##########
@@ -3727,3 +3727,61 @@ FROM score_board s
statement ok
DROP TABLE score_board;
+
+# Regularize RANGE frame
+query error DataFusion error: Error during planning: RANGE requires exactly one ORDER BY column
+select a,
+ rank() over (order by a, a + 1 RANGE BETWEEN UNBOUNDED PRECEDING AND 1 FOLLOWING) rnk
+ from (select 1 a union select 2 a) q ORDER BY a
+
+query II
+select a,
+ rank() over (order by a RANGE BETWEEN UNBOUNDED PRECEDING AND 1 FOLLOWING) rnk
+ from (select 1 a union select 2 a) q ORDER BY a
+----
+1 1
+2 2
+
+query error DataFusion error: Error during planning: RANGE requires exactly one ORDER BY column
+select a,
+ rank() over (RANGE BETWEEN UNBOUNDED PRECEDING AND 1 FOLLOWING) rnk
+ from (select 1 a union select 2 a) q ORDER BY a
+
+query II
+select a,
+ rank() over (order by a, a + 1 RANGE BETWEEN UNBOUNDED PRECEDING AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING) rnk
+ from (select 1 a union select 2 a) q ORDER BY a
+----
+1 1
+2 2
+
+query II
+select a,
+ rank() over (order by a RANGE BETWEEN UNBOUNDED PRECEDING AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING) rnk
+ from (select 1 a union select 2 a) q ORDER BY a
+----
+1 1
+2 2
+
+# TODO: this is different to Postgres which returns [1, 1] for `rnk`.
+# Comment it because it is flaky now as it depends on the order of the `a` column.
+# query II
+# select a,
+# rank() over (RANGE BETWEEN UNBOUNDED PRECEDING AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING) rnk
+# from (select 1 a union select 2 a) q ORDER BY rnk
+# ----
+# 1 1
+# 2 2
+
+# TODO: this works in Postgres which returns [1, 1].
+query error DataFusion error: Arrow error: Invalid argument error: must either specify a row count or at least one column
+select rank() over (RANGE between UNBOUNDED PRECEDING AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING) rnk
+ from (select 1 a union select 2 a) q;
+
+# TODO: this is different to Postgres which returns [1, 1] for `rnk`.
+query I
+select rank() over (order by 1 RANGE BETWEEN UNBOUNDED PRECEDING AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING) rnk
+ from (select 1 a union select 2 a) q ORDER BY rnk
+----
+1
+2
Review Comment:
I have a fix for the issue locally. But this PR focuses on doc and test change, so I will submit the fix after this is merged.
--
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-unsubscribe@arrow.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Update code comment for the cases of regularized RANGE frame and add tests for ORDER BY cases with RANGE frame [arrow-datafusion]
Posted by "viirya (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
viirya commented on code in PR #8410:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/pull/8410#discussion_r1413399215
##########
datafusion/expr/src/window_frame.rs:
##########
@@ -148,18 +148,20 @@ impl WindowFrame {
pub fn regularize(mut frame: WindowFrame, order_bys: usize) -> Result<WindowFrame> {
if frame.units == WindowFrameUnits::Range && order_bys != 1 {
// Normally, RANGE frames require an ORDER BY clause with exactly one
- // column. However, an ORDER BY clause may be absent in two edge cases.
+ // column. However, an ORDER BY clause may be absent in two edge cases:
+ // 1. start bound is UNBOUNDED or CURRENT ROW
+ // 2. end bound is CURRENT ROW or UNBOUNDED.
+ // In these cases, we regularize the RANGE frame to be equivalent to a ROWS
+ // frame with the UNBOUNDED bounds.
Review Comment:
In short, DataFusion currently allows various `ORDER BY` clause cases (empty, 1 or more column) with RANGE frame, similar to Postgres.
But for empty `ORDER BY` clause case, the window function result is different to Postgres.
See added tests.
--
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-unsubscribe@arrow.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] fix: RANGE frame can be regularized to ROWS frame only if empty ORDER BY clause [arrow-datafusion]
Posted by "viirya (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
viirya commented on code in PR #8410:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/pull/8410#discussion_r1413301505
##########
datafusion/expr/src/window_frame.rs:
##########
@@ -148,18 +148,20 @@ impl WindowFrame {
pub fn regularize(mut frame: WindowFrame, order_bys: usize) -> Result<WindowFrame> {
if frame.units == WindowFrameUnits::Range && order_bys != 1 {
// Normally, RANGE frames require an ORDER BY clause with exactly one
- // column. However, an ORDER BY clause may be absent in two edge cases.
+ // column. However, an ORDER BY clause may be absent in two edge cases:
+ // 1. start bound is UNBOUNDED or CURRENT ROW
+ // 2. end bound is CURRENT ROW or UNBOUNDED.
+ // In these cases, we regularize the RANGE frame to be equivalent to a ROWS
+ // frame with the UNBOUNDED bounds.
Review Comment:
```
postgres=# select a, rank() over (partition by a RANGE between 1 PRECEDING AND 2 FOLLOWING) rnk from (select 1 a) q;
ERROR: RANGE with offset PRECEDING/FOLLOWING requires exactly one ORDER BY column
LINE 1: select a, rank() over (partition by a RANGE between 1 PRECED...
^
postgres=# select a, rank() over (partition by a order by a RANGE between 1 PRECEDING AND 2 FOLLOWING) rnk from (select 1 a) q;
a | rnk
---+-----
1 | 1
(1 row)
postgres=# select a, rank() over (partition by a order by a, a + 1 RANGE between 1 PRECEDING AND 2 FOLLOWING) rnk from (select 1 a) q;
ERROR: RANGE with offset PRECEDING/FOLLOWING requires exactly one ORDER BY column
LINE 1: select a, rank() over (partition by a order by a, a + 1 RANG...
```
--
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-unsubscribe@arrow.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] fix: RANGE frame can be regularized to ROWS frame only if empty ORDER BY clause [arrow-datafusion]
Posted by "viirya (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
viirya commented on code in PR #8410:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/pull/8410#discussion_r1413217944
##########
datafusion/expr/src/window_frame.rs:
##########
@@ -148,18 +148,20 @@ impl WindowFrame {
pub fn regularize(mut frame: WindowFrame, order_bys: usize) -> Result<WindowFrame> {
if frame.units == WindowFrameUnits::Range && order_bys != 1 {
// Normally, RANGE frames require an ORDER BY clause with exactly one
- // column. However, an ORDER BY clause may be absent in two edge cases.
+ // column. However, an ORDER BY clause may be absent in two edge cases:
+ // 1. start bound is UNBOUNDED or CURRENT ROW
+ // 2. end bound is CURRENT ROW or UNBOUNDED.
+ // In these cases, we regularize the RANGE frame to be equivalent to a ROWS
+ // frame with the UNBOUNDED bounds.
Review Comment:
Note that actually Spark doesn't allow empty ORDER BY clause for RANGE frame in any cases. I updated this according to the comment.
--
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-unsubscribe@arrow.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
Re: [PR] Update code comment for the cases of regularized RANGE frame and add tests for ORDER BY cases with RANGE frame [arrow-datafusion]
Posted by "viirya (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
viirya merged PR #8410:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/pull/8410
--
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-unsubscribe@arrow.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org