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.

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

fix(hogql): null handling with == and != comparisons, attempt 2 #16259

Merged
merged 14 commits into from
Jun 27, 2023

Conversation

mariusandra
Copy link
Collaborator

@mariusandra mariusandra commented Jun 27, 2023

Problem

Attempt nr 2 for #16216

Changes

Compared to the previous PR, this implements a nullable property on all fields (default False), which opts fields into special null handling. I found only two fields in the database that were nullable, both on the session_recordings table. All properties are still treated as nullable.

I kept the join constraint node and check, as without true type checking and propagation, we can't say if a join constraint from a subquery is nullable or not.

How did you test this code?

  • bin/tests posthog/hogql
  • Ran a query in metabase with the ifNull team_id check (last PR) and without it (this PR), and found this performed a lot faster
  • Ran a more complex query in metabase with person joins. Verified that using isNull(argMax()) around argMax code inside those lazy tables adds no slowdown.

@mariusandra mariusandra changed the title fix(hogql): null handling with == and != comparisons fix(hogql): null handling with == and != comparisons, attempt 2 Jun 27, 2023
@mariusandra mariusandra changed the title fix(hogql): null handling with == and != comparisons, attempt 2 fix(hogql): null handling with == and != comparisons, attempt 2 Jun 27, 2023
Copy link
Collaborator

@Twixes Twixes left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This should be a lot better 👌

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants