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

feat: alp compare v2 #2071

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Jan 27, 2025
Merged

feat: alp compare v2 #2071

merged 9 commits into from
Jan 27, 2025

Conversation

joseph-isaacs
Copy link
Member

@joseph-isaacs joseph-isaacs commented Jan 24, 2025

Alp compare (v2), without patches & nullability (for now). 3 tpch queries will use this code path.

Seems like the fuzzer can help with the correctness checks (TODO).

old compare #1603

@joseph-isaacs joseph-isaacs changed the title [wip] alp compare [wip] alp compare v2 Jan 24, 2025
@joseph-isaacs joseph-isaacs changed the title [wip] alp compare v2 feat: alp compare v2 Jan 24, 2025
@joseph-isaacs joseph-isaacs marked this pull request as ready for review January 24, 2025 17:54
@joseph-isaacs joseph-isaacs enabled auto-merge (squash) January 24, 2025 18:12
@joseph-isaacs joseph-isaacs merged commit b2d01fa into develop Jan 27, 2025
21 checks passed
@joseph-isaacs joseph-isaacs deleted the ji/alp-compare branch January 27, 2025 11:10
@a10y
Copy link
Contributor

a10y commented Jan 27, 2025

Hmm, I might be missing something, but most of the time the encoded values will be bitpacked, and we don't seem to support CompareFn for bitpacked, so even with this change most of the time we'll still canonicalize, just one level deeper. Is that right?

@joseph-isaacs
Copy link
Member Author

I believe so, but canon into smaller ints might be better than into floats

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.

3 participants