This PR fixes bugs found in the [turso-
go](https://github.com/tursodatabase/turso-go) driver with UPSERT clause
earlier, where `Gorm` will (obviously) use Expr::Variable's as well as
use quotes for `Expr::Qualified` in the tail end of an UPSERT statement.
Example:
```sql
INSERT INTO users (a,b,c) VALUES (?,?,?) ON CONFLICT (`users`.`a`) DO UPDATE SET b = `excluded`.`b`, a = ?;
```
and previously we were not properly calling `rewrite_expr`, which was
not properly setting the anonymous `Expr::Variable` to `__param_N` named
parameter, so it would ignore it completely, then return the wrong # of
parameters.
Also, we didn't handle quoted "`excluded`.`x`", so it would panic in the
optimizer that Qualified should have been rewritten earlier.
Closes#3157
This adds basic support for window functions. For now:
* Only existing aggregate functions can be used as window functions.
* Specialized window-specific functions (`rank`, `row_number`, etc.) are
not yet supported.
* Only the default frame definition is implemented:
`RANGE BETWEEN UNBOUNDED PRECEDING AND CURRENT ROW EXCLUDE NO OTHERS`.
Reviewed-by: Jussi Saurio <jussi.saurio@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Preston Thorpe <preston@turso.tech>
Closes#3079
Adds initial support for window functions. For now, only existing
aggregate functions can be used as window functions—no specialized
window-specific functions are supported yet.
Currently, only the default frame definition is implemented:
RANGE BETWEEN UNBOUNDED PRECEDING AND CURRENT ROW EXCLUDE NO OTHERS.
Previously, while resetting accumulator registers, we would also
reset subsequent registers. This happened because the number of registers
to reset was computed as the sum of arguments rather than the number of
aggregate functions.
Resolves#2677
- Implements the modifier for Floor on the datetime object.
- Implements the modifier for Ceiling on the datetime object.
- Includes additional testing changes in testing/scalar-functions-
datetime.test to test the sql functionality.
Consolidation PR of #2678 and #2679 since the functions ended up being
much more complicated than I initially thought and had to be done in a
single PR.
Closes#2757
This PR unifies the logic for resolving aggregate functions. Previously,
bare aggregates (e.g. `SELECT max(a) FROM t1`) and aggregates wrapped in
expressions (e.g. `SELECT max(a) + 1 FROM t1`) were handled differently,
which led to duplicated code. Now both cases are resolved consistently.
The added benchmark shows a small improvement:
```
Prepare `SELECT first_name, last_name, state, city, age + 10, LENGTH(email), UPPER(first_name), LOWE...
time: [59.791 µs 59.898 µs 60.006 µs]
change: [-7.7090% -7.2760% -6.8242%] (p = 0.00 < 0.05)
Performance has improved.
Found 10 outliers among 100 measurements (10.00%)
8 (8.00%) high mild
2 (2.00%) high severe
```
For an existing benchmark, no change:
```
Prepare `SELECT first_name, count(1) FROM users GROUP BY first_name HAVING count(1) > 1 ORDER BY cou...
time: [11.895 µs 11.913 µs 11.931 µs]
change: [-0.2545% +0.2426% +0.6960%] (p = 0.34 > 0.05)
No change in performance detected.
Found 8 outliers among 100 measurements (8.00%)
1 (1.00%) low severe
2 (2.00%) high mild
5 (5.00%) high severe
```
Reviewed-by: Jussi Saurio <jussi.saurio@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Preston Thorpe <preston@turso.tech>
Closes#2884
Aggregate functions cannot be nested, and this is validated during the
translation of aggregate function arguments. Therefore, traversing their
child expressions is unnecessary.
Handled in the same way as in `prepare_one_select_plan` for bare
function calls. In `prepare_one_select_plan`, however, resolving
external scalar functions is performed unnecessarily twice.
The initial commits fix issues and plug gaps between ungrouped and
grouped aggregations.
The final commit consolidates the code that emits `AggStep` to prevent
future disparities between the two.
Reviewed-by: Preston Thorpe <preston@turso.tech>
Closes#2867
This bug occurred when arguments were read for the GROUP BY sorter — all
arguments were incorrectly resolved to the first column. Added tests
confirm that aggregates now work correctly both with and without the
sorter.
This commit consolidates the creation of the Aggregate struct, which was
previously handled differently in `prepare_one_select_plan` and
`resolve_aggregates`. That discrepancy caused inconsistent handling of
zero-argument aggregates.
The queries added in the new tests would previously trigger a panic.
Instead of using static elements, use a dynamically generated DBSP-
circuit to keep views.
The DBSP circuit is generated from the logical plan, which only supports
enough for us to generate the DBSP circuit at the moment.
The state of the view is still kept inside the IncrementalView, instead
of materialized at the operator level. As a consequence, this still
depends on us always populating the view at startup. Fixing this is the
next step.
Closes#2815
