[SPARK-20719] [SQL] Support LIMIT ALL #17960
Closed
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Test build #76847 has started for PR 17960 at commit |
HyukjinKwon
reviewed
May 12, 2017
| select * from testdata limit 2; | ||
| select * from arraydata limit 2; | ||
| select * from mapdata limit 2; | ||
| SELECT * FROM testdata LIMIT 2; |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I just wonder why these should be upper-cased just for curiosity. Is this way preferred?
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes. This is preferred. All the SQL keywords are preferred to use the upper case.
| }.getMessage | ||
| assert(e.contains(expected)) | ||
| } | ||
|
|
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see. This was duplicated.
Member
|
Retest this please. |
Member
|
+1, LGTM. |
|
Test build #76873 has finished for PR 17960 at commit
|
hvanhovell
reviewed
May 12, 2017
| withWindow.optional(limit) { | ||
| Limit(typedVisit(limit), withWindow) | ||
| if (ALL != null) { | ||
| // LIMIT ALL is the same as omitting the LIMIT clause |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can this be true? I don't think you need to check ALL if limit != null
|
Test build #76881 has finished for PR 17960 at commit
|
Contributor
|
LGTM - merging to master. Thanks! |
robert3005
pushed a commit
to palantir/spark
that referenced
this pull request
May 19, 2017
### What changes were proposed in this pull request? `LIMIT ALL` is the same as omitting the `LIMIT` clause. It is supported by both PrestgreSQL and Presto. This PR is to support it by adding it in the parser. ### How was this patch tested? Added a test case Author: Xiao Li <[email protected]> Closes apache#17960 from gatorsmile/LimitAll.
liyichao
pushed a commit
to liyichao/spark
that referenced
this pull request
May 24, 2017
### What changes were proposed in this pull request? `LIMIT ALL` is the same as omitting the `LIMIT` clause. It is supported by both PrestgreSQL and Presto. This PR is to support it by adding it in the parser. ### How was this patch tested? Added a test case Author: Xiao Li <[email protected]> Closes apache#17960 from gatorsmile/LimitAll.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
5 participants
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 changes were proposed in this pull request?
LIMIT ALLis the same as omitting theLIMITclause. It is supported by both PrestgreSQL and Presto. This PR is to support it by adding it in the parser.How was this patch tested?
Added a test case