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

feature(interactive): Unify ProcedureCall Into Physical Plan Operators #4075

Open
shirly121 opened this issue Jul 22, 2024 · 1 comment
Open

Comments

@shirly121
Copy link
Collaborator

shirly121 commented Jul 22, 2024

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.

The shortest path functionality needs to support queries similar to the following:

MATCH
(company:Company {name: $company})<-[:WORK_AT]-(person1:Person),
(person2:Person {id: $person2Id})
CALL shortestPath.dijkstra.stream(
  person1, person2, 'KNOWS', 'BOTH', 'weight', 5
)
YIELD totalCost
WHERE person1.id <> $person2Id
WITH person1.id AS person1Id, totalCost AS totalWeight
....

, which requires the ProcedureCall to be integrated as an operator into the entire physical plan.

Proto definition of ProcedureCall:

message Argument {
  string param_name = 1;   // param name
  int32 param_ind = 2;     // index of param
  common.Value value = 3;  // real value
}

message Query {
  common.NameOrId query_name = 1;
  repeated Argument arguments = 2;
}

The compiler should support registering stored procedures through YAML configuration files and support passing tag types as parameters.

Copy link
Contributor

/cc @lnfjpt @shirly121, this issus/pr has had no activity for for a long time, could you folks help to review the status ?
To suppress further notifications,

  • for issues,
    • if it is waiting for further response from the reporter/author, please help to add the label requires-further-info,
    • if you have already started working on it, please add the label work-in-progress to the issue,
    • if this issue requires further designing discussion and not in current plan, or won't be fixed, please add the label requires-further-discussion or wontfix to the issue,
  • for pull requests,
    • if you are still working on it and it is not ready for reviewing, please convert this pull request as draft PR,
    • if you have decided to hold this development on, please add the requires-further-discussion label to the pull request.
      Thanks!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants