calcite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "bupt_ljy"<>
Subject Re: Problems about subsets clause order for MATCH_RECOGNIZE
Date Mon, 17 Dec 2018 03:52:45 GMT
Hi Dawid,
 The elements’s order in SUBSET clause is consistent with the order in PATTERN, is this
what you mean?
 Let me take an example:  SUBSET X=(A,B)

 I’m not very sure about the implementations of Oracle, but I’m curious that why we use
sortedSet to store the elements(A,B) of SUBSET if we don’t need the “sorted”.

Jiayi Liao

Original Message
Sender:Dawid; Julian;
Date:Sunday, Dec 16, 2018 20:08
Subject:Re: Problems about subsets clause order for MATCH_RECOGNIZE

Hi Jiayi, I don't think it should any difference what is the order in the SUBSET clause. The
PATTERN clause specifies the definitive order of pattern variables. SUBSET clause just groups
them as a single entity you can reference. Therefore LAST/FIRST/PREV/NEXT/AFTER MATCH etc.
will take into account only order in the PATTERN clause. Best, Dawid On 16/12/2018 08:07,
Julian Hyde wrote:  I don’t understand MATCH_RECOGNIZE well enough to give an opinion. Is
there a query that gives different results on Oracle if you change the order of items in SUBSET?
  It seems that the parser preserves the order of items in the subset, but the SqlToRelConverter
does not, hence the line "subsets=[[[DOWN, STRT]]” in SqlToRelConverterTest.xml. I would
be concerned if the parser re-ordered things, but I am not too concerned about SqlToRelConverter
unless the semantics are wrong.   On Dec 14, 2018, at 12:37 AM, bupt_ljy
wrote:   Hi all,  It’s my first time to send emails to Calcite developers. It’s a really
good project and many projects benefit from it.  Now I’ve encountered a problem about the
subsets for MATCH_RECOGNIZE in thetestMatchRecognizeSubset1() testing. From the results, I
can tell that"subset stdn = (strt, down)"will be explained to "SUBSET \"STDN\" = (\"DOWN\",
\"STRT\”)”, which confuses me. IMO, It’ll affect the result of functions like“FIRST”
and“LAST”, which may not be what I want, although it works fine with“AVG” function.
 I’m not sure if this is a bug, or anyone can tell me how we arrive here?      Best,  Jiayi
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, 8-Bit, 0 bytes)
View raw message