[GLUTEN-3644][CH] Revert the logic to support the custom aggregate functions #3648
Conversation
This file contains 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
|
Run Gluten Clickhouse CI |
rui-mo
reviewed
Nov 8, 2023
|
It seems only affect CH backend. yeah, one more ut is better to avoid regression in future. |
…nctions In PR apache#3629, it removes the logic to support the custom aggregate functions, must be reverted. Close apache#3644.
|
Run Gluten Clickhouse CI |
|
Add a ut to make sure that it must use custome agg transformer to run. @rui-mo @ulysses-you |
|
ping @ulysses-you @rui-mo |
rui-mo
approved these changes
Nov 8, 2023
|
===== Performance report for TPCH SF2000 with Velox backend, for reference only ====
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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?
In PR #3629, it removes the logic to support the custom aggregate functions, must be reverted.
Close #3644.
(Fixes: #3644)
How was this patch tested?
(Please explain how this patch was tested. E.g. unit tests, integration tests, manual tests)
(If this patch involves UI changes, please attach a screenshot; otherwise, remove this)