Skip to content

branch-4.1: [fix](fe) Fix isCountStar incorrectly treating count(null) as count(*) #62548#62667

Merged
yiguolei merged 1 commit intobranch-4.1from
auto-pick-62548-branch-4.1
Apr 22, 2026
Merged

branch-4.1: [fix](fe) Fix isCountStar incorrectly treating count(null) as count(*) #62548#62667
yiguolei merged 1 commit intobranch-4.1from
auto-pick-62548-branch-4.1

Conversation

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Cherry-picked from #62548

#62548)

### What problem does this PR solve?

Problem Summary:

`Count.isCountStar()` returns `true` for `count(null)` because it only
checks `child(0) instanceof Literal` without excluding `NullLiteral`.
Since `count(null)` always returns 0 (it counts non-null values of a
constant null), it is semantically different from `count(*)` which
counts all rows.

This could cause incorrect results if downstream rewrite rules (e.g.
`PushDownAggThroughJoin`, `SimplifyWindowExpression`,
`PushCountIntoUnionAll`) use `isCountStar()` before
`CountLiteralRewrite` has a chance to rewrite `count(null)` to `0`.

### Release note

Fixed `count(null)` being incorrectly treated as `count(*)` in query
optimizer, which could lead to wrong results in certain rewrite
scenarios.

---------

Co-authored-by: Copilot <[email protected]>
@github-actions github-actions Bot requested a review from yiguolei as a code owner April 21, 2026 07:00
@Thearas
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Thearas commented Apr 21, 2026

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 Apr 21, 2026
@Thearas
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Thearas commented Apr 21, 2026

run buildall

@hello-stephen
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

FE Regression Coverage Report

Increment line coverage 0.00% (0/1) 🎉
Increment coverage report
Complete coverage report

@github-actions github-actions Bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by one committer. label Apr 22, 2026
@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

PR approved by at least one committer and no changes requested.

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

PR approved by anyone and no changes requested.

@yiguolei yiguolei merged commit 5f9a84d into branch-4.1 Apr 22, 2026
29 of 32 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

approved Indicates a PR has been approved by one committer. reviewed

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants