fix: Fixes bug in get_max_in_list_size #1158
Conversation
|
/gcbrun |
|
/gcbrun |
| # getattr(..., "cast") expression above is looking for lists where the contents are casts and not simple literals. | ||
| return 50 | ||
| else: | ||
| return 16000 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Curious to know: how did you find this other number for the list size? It would be helpful to put some sort of product documentation as a comment for future reference, but I could only find community posts mentioning it like this one: https://community.snowflake.com/s/question/0D5Do00000O3sJ0KAJ/how-o-get-around-th-16k-limit-on-number-of-expressions-in-in-clause-in-sql-generated-by-a-businessobjects-report
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It was not the same post but I saw another 2 Snowflake community posts.
I don't think we need to document it because this code is ensuring that we don't hit the 16k limit, at 16,000 we'll switch to:
WHERE id IN (1, ..., 16000) OR id IN (16001, ..., n)
We will find other limits for other engines I'm sure. I started to read about SQL Server but that has a memory limit based on the execution plan and not a hard/fixed limit, so I decided to just include the limits I knew about for now.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Right, it makes sense, it's clearer for me now, thank you!
And for sure, totally agree that we might face it for other engines but at the moment we can stick with the ones we're aware of the values and usage
|
/gcbrun |
This PR fixes a bug in the code introduced in #1146 and also caters for Oracle IN list limit of 1000.
Closes #1157