Skip to content

branch-4.0: [opt](varbinary) support multi_distinct_count about varbinary and add conf mapping iceberg uuid #59406 #59483

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
Merged
yiguolei merged 1 commit into from
Dec 31, 2025
Merged

branch-4.0: [opt](varbinary) support multi_distinct_count about varbinary and add conf mapping iceberg uuid #59406 #59483

yiguolei merged 1 commit into from
Dec 31, 2025

Conversation

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

@github-actions github-actions bot commented Dec 30, 2025

Cherry-picked from #59406

@zhangstar333
[opt](varbinary) support multi_distinct_count about varbinary and add…
ad4bf10 
… conf mapping iceberg uuid (#59406)

### What problem does this PR solve?

doc apache/doris-website#3231

1. iceberg uuid type use the conf of enable.varbinary.mapping to control
mapping type, default is mapping to string type.
2. as binary type not support used in group by key, so count(distinct
binary) will thrown error now, support binary type in
multi_distinct_count agg function.
@github-actions github-actions bot requested a review from yiguolei as a code owner December 30, 2025 07:14
@Thearas
Copy link
Contributor

Thearas commented Dec 30, 2025

Thank you for your contribution to Apache Doris.
Don't know what should be done next? See How to process your PR.

Please clearly describe your PR:

  1. What problem was fixed (it's best to include specific error reporting information). How it was fixed.
  2. Which behaviors were modified. What was the previous behavior, what is it now, why was it modified, and what possible impacts might there be.
  3. What features were added. Why was this function added?
  4. Which code was refactored and why was this part of the code refactored?
  5. Which functions were optimized and what is the difference before and after the optimization?

@dataroaring dataroaring reopened this Dec 30, 2025
@Thearas
Copy link
Contributor

Thearas commented Dec 30, 2025

run buildall

@doris-robot
Copy link

doris-robot commented Dec 30, 2025

BE UT Coverage Report

Increment line coverage 0.00% (0/5) 🎉

Increment coverage report
Complete coverage report

Category Coverage
Function Coverage 53.35% (18666/34989)
Line Coverage 39.13% (172944/441993)
Region Coverage 33.78% (133595/395430)
Branch Coverage 34.78% (57781/166147)

@yiguolei yiguolei merged commit 1e89124 into branch-4.0 Dec 31, 2025
23 of 27 checks passed
@github-actions github-actions bot deleted the auto-pick-59406-branch-4.0 branch December 31, 2025 03:49
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@yiguolei yiguolei yiguolei approved these changes

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants

@Thearas @doris-robot @yiguolei @dataroaring @zhangstar333