You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Is your feature request related to a problem?
Currently in OpenSearch, SQL doesn't support update or evaluate nested fields like PPL. To make them align, we may need to make SQL support these features as well.
e.g.
Update fields
PPL supports updating the fields while SQL produces a new field with the same field_name which may leads to error.
What solution would you like?
These 2 features are all supported in EvalOperator. But when compiling SQL, it won't use EvalOperator now but only ProjectOperator, which contributes to the differences above.
To make them align, there could be 2 optional solutions:
Make SQL generates EvalOperator as well like PPL
Enhance ProjectOperator to support these 2 features.
What alternatives have you considered?
A clear and concise description of any alternative solutions or features you've considered.
Do you have any additional context?
Add any other context or screenshots about the feature request here.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Is your feature request related to a problem?
Currently in OpenSearch, SQL doesn't support update or evaluate nested fields like PPL. To make them align, we may need to make SQL support these features as well.
e.g.
PPL supports updating the fields while SQL produces a new field with the same field_name which may leads to error.
PPL supports evaluating fields from left to right while SQL cannot resolve the reference.
What solution would you like?
These 2 features are all supported in EvalOperator. But when compiling SQL, it won't use EvalOperator now but only ProjectOperator, which contributes to the differences above.
To make them align, there could be 2 optional solutions:
What alternatives have you considered?
A clear and concise description of any alternative solutions or features you've considered.
Do you have any additional context?
Add any other context or screenshots about the feature request here.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: