WIP: Proposal to address mixed-type attribute querying limitations #4391
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What this PR does:
Below is my understanding of the current limitations. Please feel free to correct me if I’ve misunderstood or overlooked something.
Attributes of the same type are stored in the same column. For example, integers are stored in one column and floats in another.
Querying operates in two stages:
The issue arises because predicates are generated based on the operand type. If an attribute is stored as a float but the operand is an integer, the predicate evaluates against the integers column instead of the floats column. This results in incorrect behavior.
Proposed Solution
The idea is to generate predicates for both integers and floats, allowing both columns to be scanned for the queried attribute.
In this PR, I’ve created a proof-of-concept by copying the existing
createAttributeIterator
function tocreateAttributeIterator2
. This duplication is intentional, as the original function is used in multiple places, and I want to avoid introducing unintended side effects until the approach is validated.WDYT? :)
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #4332
Checklist
CHANGELOG.md
updated - the order of entries should be[CHANGE]
,[FEATURE]
,[ENHANCEMENT]
,[BUGFIX]