Add Presto TVF RFC #39
Conversation
prestodb-ci
requested review from
a team,
NivinCS and
jp-sivaprasad
and removed request for
a team
|
LGTM, it would be great if we could split the RFC into what is configurable and what needs to be configured and what is built in so that its easier for the users to read the RFC directly |
| private final String schema; | ||
| private final String name; | ||
| private final List<ArgumentSpecification> arguments; | ||
| private final ReturnTypeSpecification returnTypeSpecification; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What is the ReturnTypeSpecification ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Had missed the api. Have added it.
I had split the declaration, analysis parts of the API and the execution API with the planning pieces (from the framework) in between. I can see why this is confusing as the user does not have continuity with the API. Have changed the writing now. |
| private final boolean rowSemantics; | ||
| private final boolean pruneWhenEmpty; | ||
| private final boolean passThroughColumns; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
While I can't think of a way to simplify this, this seems complicated to debug if the connector author doesn't get it right. I'm wondering what sort of testing tools we can give to connector authors to validate the behavior of their functions? For example, is it possible to see the plan of a proposed table valued function and validate that the plan is correct? It would seem like any TVF would want to write tests that validate the TVF is correctly planned, right?
No description provided.