[FLINK-35854][table] Upgrade Calcite version to 1.35.0 #26547
Conversation
| [INFO] | +- org.apache.calcite.avatica:avatica-core:jar:1.23.0:compile | ||
| [INFO] | +- org.apiguardian:apiguardian-api:jar:1.1.2:compile | ||
| [INFO] | +- org.checkerframework:checker-qual:jar:3.12.0:compile | ||
| [INFO] | +- org.checkerframework:checker-qual:jar:3.10.0:compile |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this is not related to this commit, however seems at some point the version was downgraded in Flink.
There is no critical changes, so should be ok
|
|
||
| @Override | ||
| public DataType getResultType() { | ||
| return DataTypes.BOOLEAN(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is probably the main question: should we have it for different types or boolean is enough?
So far in existing tests there is only boolean in use
|
@flinkbot run azure |
| @@ -3061,34 +3061,6 @@ SqlNode SqlReset() : | |||
| } | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
| /** Parses a TRY_CAST invocation. */ | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since now TRY_CAST comes with Calcite https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-4771
| @@ -168,8 +168,8 @@ public SqlLibrary semantics() { | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| @Override | |||
| public boolean allowCoercionStringToArray() { | |||
| return SqlConformanceEnum.DEFAULT.allowCoercionStringToArray(); | |||
| public boolean allowLenientCoercion() { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suddenly was just renamed in Calcite apache/calcite@b042094
snuyanzin
force-pushed
the
flink35854_1
branch
4 times, most recently
from
0bab0b8 to
6c34459
Compare
| @@ -293,6 +292,8 @@ | |||
| "DATETIME_DIFF" | |||
| "DATETIME_INTERVAL_CODE" | |||
| "DATETIME_INTERVAL_PRECISION" | |||
| "DAYOFWEEK" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am curious why these 2 re in this list and not in nonReservedKeywordsToAdd.
| @@ -224,7 +224,6 @@ | |||
| "RESUME" | |||
| "TABLES" | |||
| "TIMESTAMP_LTZ" | |||
| "TRY_CAST" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am curious why TRY_CAST is removed as a keyword. I had assumed it would still be a keyword but Calcite would now provide the implementation.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
because it was added to keywords on Calcite level, no need to add it one more time
What is the purpose of the change
Upgrade Calcite to 1.35.0
Brief change log
TBD
Verifying this change
existing tests
Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:
@Public(Evolving): ( no)Documentation