Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

feat: Enable Support for Querying UDF through Logical Type #441

Closed
wants to merge 33 commits into from
Closed

feat: Enable Support for Querying UDF through Logical Type #441

wants to merge 33 commits into from

Conversation

adarsh2397
Copy link
Contributor

@adarsh2397 adarsh2397 commented Oct 20, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Tagging Discussion: Support for Querying using UDF Type

Changes Made:

  • Added a file to store the Enum of different UDF Logical Types
  • Added methods to get UDF by type in catalog_manager.py and udf_service.py
  • Modified a existing UDF FastRCNNObjectDetector and a test test_show_info_executor

Pending Tasks:

  • Should we add a check in CREATE UDF statement to check if inputs and outputs match?
  • Add test cases to query using the Logical UDF Type instead of the name

@adarsh2397 adarsh2397 marked this pull request as draft October 20, 2022 04:53
@adarsh2397
fix: a typo in operators.py
f529015
@adarsh2397
changes: remove udf_types enum and use existing type from catalog
be3ed5e
@adarsh2397
fix: formatting of python files
90a486f
@adarsh2397
checkpoint commit: modified binder and catalog manager
fabf059
@adarsh2397
(add): shift resolving UDF by logcal type to planner
e75c8c5
@adarsh2397
add: Convert Logical to Physical UDF in LogicalGetToSeqScan
4c09345
@adarsh2397
fix: added condition to check if _function is None before fetching udf
a2a4b27
@adarsh2397
change: util to check if FunctionExpression in expression_utils
0802dbd
@adarsh2397
change: using expressionUtils to check and cast to AbstractExpression
73adfc2
@adarsh2397
change: add function_type parameter to FunctionExpression
1d8784d
@adarsh2397
change: check if function_type is set before fetching UDF by type
f561b2b
@adarsh2397
change: ran formatter.py
cfda845
@adarsh2397
fix: formatting issues
5b69688
@adarsh2397
fix: small formatting errors
b536921
@adarsh2397
fix: formatting errors in rules.py
73b6a7a
@adarsh2397
fix: add check if target_list is None
92afa85
@xzdandy
Copy link
Collaborator

xzdandy commented Nov 18, 2022

Can we add an integration test that uses the Logical UDF?

@adarsh2397 adarsh2397 marked this pull request as ready for review November 18, 2022 19:35
@adarsh2397
Copy link
Contributor Author

Can we add an integration test that uses the Logical UDF?

Yep. Working on it. Will update on this thread once I push the changes.

@adarsh2397
Copy link
Contributor Author

Added integration tests for using UDF in a simple select query and as part of a LATERAL JOIN. The PR is ready to merge. Not sure why the coverage has dropped though. I tried investigating, but could not find the issue.

@jarulraj
Copy link
Member

jarulraj commented Apr 1, 2023 •
edited
Loading

@IshSiva @kaushikravichandran @jiashenC @gaurav274 Do we need this PR given the recent changes in decorators?

@gaurav274 gaurav274 closed this Apr 4, 2023
@jarulraj jarulraj deleted the udf-types branch April 9, 2023 04:33
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@jarulraj jarulraj Awaiting requested review from jarulraj

@gaurav274 gaurav274 Awaiting requested review from gaurav274

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@adarsh2397 @xzdandy @jarulraj @gaurav274