Support CTAS #125
Support CTAS #125
Conversation
| return proj->CreateRel(create_table->schema_name, create_table->table_name); | ||
| } | ||
| default: | ||
| return child; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
returning child here seems weird. what's the reasoning?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It'd be useful to document this branch as well with the answer. I'm guessing we're treating this as a no-op for all non-write operations.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
RootOp is always a ProjectionRelation for read operations (existing code). ProjRel is added in line 820. For write_op we should return the child relation without adding projection. Only CTAS needed to handle column names here.
Any unsupported write op we throw an exception above in TransformOp, so here we should just return the child.
I can add below comment in next PR if it is helpful.
// return child relation for other supported write operations (INSERT, DELETE)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't understand why would we wouldn't throw here. It sounds like you're saying that code above is going to throw so we just return something random here. And what's wrong with adding a projection relation?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let's merge this change and open an issue to follow-up on better clarity around why we have these weird specialized cases outside of individual transform ops.
|
As mentioned, going to merge this or as part of cherry picking from other branch and then reevaluate in subsequent issue. |
No description provided.