-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 25.6k
[ES|QL] ToAggregateMetricDouble function #124595
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
Merged
limotova
merged 20 commits into
elastic:main
from
limotova:to-aggregate-metric-double-function
Mar 18, 2025
Merged
Changes from 4 commits
Commits
Show all changes
20 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
2f64c49
ToAggregateMetricDouble function
limotova 7a49ca5
Merge branch 'main' into to-aggregate-metric-double-function
limotova efab117
add aggmetricliteral to serialization tests named writable registery
limotova 58104fb
flip order of args of factory builders
limotova 61c3fef
agg metric docs
limotova a65a1d3
multi-values and Cast.cast
limotova 227de7d
except undo cast because it doesn't cooperate with multivalue
limotova 2ccfd46
introduce AggregateMetricDoubleVector?
limotova 5c4d965
fix tests
limotova 0594990
fix last test
limotova d2531de
Merge branch 'main' into to-aggregate-metric-double-function
limotova ce814cf
move AggMetricVectorBuilder to To Function and use in U/Long/Int fact…
limotova 804e980
add different case for single-valued
limotova ec2862b
remove redundant closed check
limotova 4749325
Merge branch 'main' into to-aggregate-metric-double-function
limotova b5afb7f
Merge branch 'main' into to-aggregate-metric-double-function
limotova 9b47fc3
Update docs/changelog/124595.yaml
limotova a2613f3
fix changelog and make logic in double block same as others
limotova 9e4f3b4
fix loop start point
limotova e469df8
Merge branch 'main' into to-aggregate-metric-double-function
limotova File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can in a follow up the usage of
CompositeBlockfor aggregate metric double field be replaced withAggregateMetricDoubleBlockBuilder?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not sure I understand? There's no block creation here, just fetching the value from the block that already exists, so no building is involved
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sorry, this is comment doesn't make sense here. I think I was more wondering about whether in
AggregateMetricDoubleBlockBuilderwe should use build a specialized block instead of buildingCompositeBlock.ComposteBlockis very generic and using this here now I think is ok, I'm just wondering whether in the future this makes sense? (when there are more usages ofCompositeBlock)There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We could if we wanted, but I'm not sure it's all that important. The entire compute engine is pretty ok with runtime types and treating blocks in specific ways based on the input. We don't have a special type for utf-8 text - just bytes - so I'm not sure we'd need a special type for these blocks.
If we want it we can have it for sure, but I don't think it's all that important.