Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

fix: skip schema check to avoid schema mismatch brought by metadata #5662

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Mar 7, 2025
Merged

fix: skip schema check to avoid schema mismatch brought by metadata #5662

merged 5 commits into from
Mar 7, 2025

Conversation

v0y4g3r
Copy link
Contributor

@v0y4g3r v0y4g3r commented Mar 6, 2025

I hereby agree to the terms of the GreptimeDB CLA.

Refer to a related PR or issue link (optional)

What's changed and what's your intention?

Skip schema check in aggr to avoid schema mismatch caused by metadata.

PR Checklist

Please convert it to a draft if some of the following conditions are not met.

  • I have written the necessary rustdoc comments.
  • I have added the necessary unit tests and integration tests.
  • This PR requires documentation updates.
  • API changes are backward compatible.
  • Schema or data changes are backward compatible.

@v0y4g3r v0y4g3r requested a review from evenyag as a code owner March 6, 2025 12:45
@coderabbitai coderabbitai
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Mar 6, 2025

Important

Review skipped

Auto reviews are disabled on this repository.

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the docs-not-required This change does not impact docs. label Mar 6, 2025
@yihong0618
Copy link
Contributor

maybe add sqlness for this?

@v0y4g3r v0y4g3r requested a review from a team as a code owner March 6, 2025 13:27
killme2008
killme2008 approved these changes Mar 6, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@killme2008 killme2008 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

It's better to move the test into cases/standalone/common/cte/

@v0y4g3r
fix/skip-schema-check:
b619bae 
 ### Update CTE Test Cases

 - **Added GRPC Latencies Test**: Introduced a new test case for GRPC latencies in `cte.result` and `cte.sql` under `standalone/common/cte`.
 - **Removed Redundant Test Files**: Deleted `cte.result` and `cte.sql` under `standalone/common/range` as they were duplicates of the new test case.
@killme2008 killme2008 added this pull request to the merge queue Mar 7, 2025
Merged via the queue into GreptimeTeam:main with commit 56c8c06 Mar 7, 2025
31 of 37 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@killme2008 killme2008 killme2008 approved these changes

@waynexia waynexia waynexia approved these changes

@evenyag evenyag Awaiting requested review from evenyag evenyag is a code owner

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
docs-not-required This change does not impact docs.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

0.12 doesn't support GROUP BY in CTE query
4 participants
@v0y4g3r @yihong0618 @killme2008 @waynexia