[Fix](Planner) remove json -> operator convert to json_extract #24679
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
apache#19899)" This reverts commit f54a068.
|
run buildall |
|
(From new machine)TeamCity pipeline, clickbench performance test result: |
morrySnow
approved these changes
Sep 20, 2023
github-actions
bot
added
the
approved
|
PR approved by at least one committer and no changes requested. |
|
PR approved by anyone and no changes requested. |
yiguolei
added
dev/2.0.2
kind/behavior-changed
usercase
xiaokang
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 21, 2023
This was referenced Sep 28, 2023
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Proposed changes
Revert "feature add json->operator convert to json_extract (#19899)"
because it conflict with lambda syntax
This reverts commit f54a068.
I think this PR need to pick to 2.0.2 because it changed some behavior and we should disable this usage as soon as possible since not too many people are using 2.0 now.
Further comments
If this is a relatively large or complex change, kick off the discussion at dev@doris.apache.org by explaining why you chose the solution you did and what alternatives you considered, etc...