-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
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 tests for Presto comparison functions for custom types with custom comparison functions #11019
Add tests for Presto comparison functions for custom types with custom comparison functions #11019
Conversation
✅ Deploy Preview for meta-velox canceled.
|
This pull request was exported from Phabricator. Differential Revision: D62893143 |
This pull request was exported from Phabricator. Differential Revision: D62893143 |
…m comparison functions (facebookincubator#11019) Summary: Pull Request resolved: facebookincubator#11019 facebookincubator#11015 added support for custom types to provide custom comparison functions, motivated by the need to support TimestampWithTimezone's comparison semantics. I validated the UDFs provided in Comparisons.h on top of this change. It does not look like any further changes are needed in those files, but I added explicit tests for TimestampWithTimezone in the various comparison UDFs. I also added tests for the UDFs that support Generic arguments, to ensure that when the Type underlying the Generic provides custom comparison functions, that is respected. I considered adding checks to the UDFs that support templated arguments to ensure the type does not provide custom comparison functions, as these are not supported in any of them (e.g. between, <, >, and the SIMD versions of comparison functions). However, someone would have to explicitly register these functions for the custom type, and I don't think it's unreasonable to expect the user to test these functions work as expected when doing so, I don't think the per-batch check is worth the (admittedly small) overhead. Differential Revision: D62893143
65d7718
to
c7b46a9
Compare
This pull request was exported from Phabricator. Differential Revision: D62893143 |
…m comparison functions (facebookincubator#11019) Summary: Pull Request resolved: facebookincubator#11019 facebookincubator#11015 added support for custom types to provide custom comparison functions, motivated by the need to support TimestampWithTimezone's comparison semantics. I validated the UDFs provided in Comparisons.h on top of this change. It does not look like any further changes are needed in those files, but I added explicit tests for TimestampWithTimezone in the various comparison UDFs. I also added tests for the UDFs that support Generic arguments, to ensure that when the Type underlying the Generic provides custom comparison functions, that is respected. I considered adding checks to the UDFs that support templated arguments to ensure the type does not provide custom comparison functions, as these are not supported in any of them (e.g. between, <, >, and the SIMD versions of comparison functions). However, someone would have to explicitly register these functions for the custom type, and I don't think it's unreasonable to expect the user to test these functions work as expected when doing so, I don't think the per-batch check is worth the (admittedly small) overhead. Differential Revision: D62893143
c7b46a9
to
c0fb0d3
Compare
This pull request was exported from Phabricator. Differential Revision: D62893143 |
…m comparison functions (facebookincubator#11019) Summary: Pull Request resolved: facebookincubator#11019 facebookincubator#11015 added support for custom types to provide custom comparison functions, motivated by the need to support TimestampWithTimezone's comparison semantics. I validated the UDFs provided in Comparisons.h on top of this change. It does not look like any further changes are needed in those files, but I added explicit tests for TimestampWithTimezone in the various comparison UDFs. I also added tests for the UDFs that support Generic arguments, to ensure that when the Type underlying the Generic provides custom comparison functions, that is respected. I considered adding checks to the UDFs that support templated arguments to ensure the type does not provide custom comparison functions, as these are not supported in any of them (e.g. between, <, >, and the SIMD versions of comparison functions). However, someone would have to explicitly register these functions for the custom type, and I don't think it's unreasonable to expect the user to test these functions work as expected when doing so, I don't think the per-batch check is worth the (admittedly small) overhead. Reviewed By: kgpai Differential Revision: D62893143
c0fb0d3
to
534a9de
Compare
…m comparison functions (facebookincubator#11019) Summary: Pull Request resolved: facebookincubator#11019 facebookincubator#11015 added support for custom types to provide custom comparison functions, motivated by the need to support TimestampWithTimezone's comparison semantics. I validated the UDFs provided in Comparisons.h on top of this change. It does not look like any further changes are needed in those files, but I added explicit tests for TimestampWithTimezone in the various comparison UDFs. I also added tests for the UDFs that support Generic arguments, to ensure that when the Type underlying the Generic provides custom comparison functions, that is respected. I considered adding checks to the UDFs that support templated arguments to ensure the type does not provide custom comparison functions, as these are not supported in any of them (e.g. between, <, >, and the SIMD versions of comparison functions). However, someone would have to explicitly register these functions for the custom type, and I don't think it's unreasonable to expect the user to test these functions work as expected when doing so, I don't think the per-batch check is worth the (admittedly small) overhead. Reviewed By: kgpai Differential Revision: D62893143
This pull request was exported from Phabricator. Differential Revision: D62893143 |
534a9de
to
29fea07
Compare
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.
@kevinwilfong thanks!
This pull request has been merged in 52750de. |
Conbench analyzed the 1 benchmark run on commit There were no benchmark performance regressions. 🎉 The full Conbench report has more details. |
…m comparison functions (facebookincubator#11019) Summary: Pull Request resolved: facebookincubator#11019 facebookincubator#11015 added support for custom types to provide custom comparison functions, motivated by the need to support TimestampWithTimezone's comparison semantics. I validated the UDFs provided in Comparisons.h on top of this change. It does not look like any further changes are needed in those files, but I added explicit tests for TimestampWithTimezone in the various comparison UDFs. I also added tests for the UDFs that support Generic arguments, to ensure that when the Type underlying the Generic provides custom comparison functions, that is respected. I considered adding checks to the UDFs that support templated arguments to ensure the type does not provide custom comparison functions, as these are not supported in any of them (e.g. between, <, >, and the SIMD versions of comparison functions). However, someone would have to explicitly register these functions for the custom type, and I don't think it's unreasonable to expect the user to test these functions work as expected when doing so, I don't think the per-batch check is worth the (admittedly small) overhead. Reviewed By: xiaoxmeng, kgpai Differential Revision: D62893143 fbshipit-source-id: b9c9e2877b3c3a951b3fca9f371feac1e8d14d8e
Summary:
#11015 added support for custom types to provide
custom comparison functions, motivated by the need to support TimestampWithTimezone's
comparison semantics.
I validated the UDFs provided in Comparisons.h on top of this change.
It does not look like any further changes are needed in those files, but I added explicit tests for
TimestampWithTimezone in the various comparison UDFs. I also added tests for the UDFs that
support Generic arguments, to ensure that when the Type underlying the Generic provides custom
comparison functions, that is respected.
I considered adding checks to the UDFs that support templated arguments to ensure the type does
not provide custom comparison functions, as these are not supported in any of them (e.g. between,
<, >, and the SIMD versions of comparison functions). However, someone would have to explicitly
register these functions for the custom type, and I don't think it's unreasonable to expect the user to
test these functions work as expected when doing so, I don't think the per-batch check is worth the
(admittedly small) overhead.
Differential Revision: D62893143