Conversation
src/EFCore.SqlServer.NTS/Query/Internal/SqlServerNetTopologySuiteAggregateMethodTranslator.cs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
src/EFCore.SqlServer.NTS/Query/Internal/SqlServerNetTopologySuiteAggregateMethodTranslator.cs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
| IDiagnosticsLogger<DbLoggerCategory.Query> logger) | ||
| { | ||
| if (source.Selector is not SqlExpression sqlExpression | ||
| || (method != GeometryCombineMethod && method != UnionMethod && method != ConvexHullMethod)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why use different patterns in 2 providers in same PR. 😉
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Only because in SQLite we need to compose the additional Collect before doing ST_ConvexHull...
|
Amazing. 🎉 |
Yeah, it's really nice to see this working - thanks for doing all the infra for it! |
bricelam
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So cool to see this. EF6 never had them!
src/EFCore.SqlServer.NTS/Query/Internal/SqlServerNetTopologySuiteAggregateMethodTranslator.cs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
src/EFCore.SqlServer.NTS/Query/Internal/SqlServerNetTopologySuiteAggregateMethodTranslator.cs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...SqlServer.NTS/Query/Internal/SqlServerNetTopologySuiteAggregateMethodCallTranslatorPlugin.cs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
src/EFCore.Sqlite.NTS/Query/Internal/SqliteNetTopologySuiteAggregateMethodTranslator.cs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
src/EFCore.Sqlite.NTS/Query/Internal/SqliteNetTopologySuiteAggregateMethodTranslator.cs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
src/EFCore.Sqlite.NTS/Query/Internal/SqliteNetTopologySuiteAggregateMethodTranslator.cs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
test/EFCore.SqlServer.FunctionalTests/Query/SpatialQuerySqlServerGeographyTest.cs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
FYI corresponding support for PostGIS: npgsql/efcore.pg@f77330d |
|
@smitpatel will hold off merging for a bit in case you have further comments. |
|
BTW @bricelam PostGIS has a few more spatial aggregate functions: https://postgis.net/docs/PostGIS_Special_Functions_Index.html#PostGIS_Aggregate_Functions |
|
FYI holding off merging this until we decide on top-level aggregate strategy, as per #28104 (comment). |
|
@smitpatel now that we've excluded top-level aggregates (#28264), I think we can come back to this (@bricelam approved for the spatial side but maybe you have comments on the query aggregate side). |
| nullable: true, | ||
| argumentsPropagateNullability: new[] { false }, | ||
| typeof(Geometry), | ||
| _typeMappingSource.FindMapping(typeof(Geometry), storeType)); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Validate that sqlExpression has TypeMapping assigned (like other method/member translators in NTS. If you want to default fallback to geometry then assign the type mapping to sqlExpression first and then just propagate here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks, done. Note that I still look up the return type mapping since the sqlExpression's mapping may be for a specific geometry type (e.g. Point), but the aggregate methods return Geometry and the CLR type won't match.
src/Shared/Check.cs
Outdated
| [Conditional("DEBUG")] | ||
| [DoesNotReturn] | ||
| public static void DebugFail(string message) | ||
| => throw new Exception($"Check.DebugAssert failed: {message}"); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Message points to DebugAssert :/
|
Hello @roji! Because this pull request has the p.s. you can customize the way I help with merging this pull request, such as holding this pull request until a specific person approves. Simply @mention me (
|
|
Apologies, while this PR appears ready to be merged, I've been configured to only merge when all checks have explicitly passed. The following integrations have not reported any progress on their checks and are blocking auto-merge:
These integrations are possibly never going to report a check, and unblocking auto-merge likely requires a human being to update my configuration to exempt these integrations from requiring a passing check. Give feedback on thisFrom the bot dev teamWe've tried to tune the bot such that it posts a comment like this only when auto-merge is blocked for exceptional, non-intuitive reasons. When the bot's auto-merge capability is properly configured, auto-merge should operate as you would intuitively expect and you should not see any spurious comments. Please reach out to us at fabricbotservices@microsoft.com to provide feedback if you believe you're seeing this comment appear spuriously. Please note that we usually are unable to update your bot configuration on your team's behalf, but we're happy to help you identify your bot admin. |
Closes #13278