Add a non-incremental / batch oracle to the indexed left-join property tests - #6855
Open
nmarasoiu wants to merge 3 commits into
Open
Add a non-incremental / batch oracle to the indexed left-join property tests#6855nmarasoiu wants to merge 3 commits into
nmarasoiu wants to merge 3 commits into
Conversation
…tests. The oracle integrates both inputs, computes matched rows with stream_join, derives right-key presence with stream_aggregate, and subtracts unmatched candidates whose keys occur on the right. It supports signed Z-set weights, including keys represented only by negative weights. The existing reference implementation remains in place and checks left join through a composition of incremental operators. The new oracle recomputes from accumulated batches, independently covering the incrementalization behavior used by both ordinary and balanced left joins in per-step and transaction modes.
nmarasoiu
marked this pull request as draft
August 13, 2026 17:17
The indexed left-join property tests drew weights from
generate_join_test_data(10, 5, 1, 50). Weights come from the half-open
range -max_weight..max_weight, so max_weight = 1 yielded only {-1, 0}.
Zero-weight tuples are no-ops, which made every non-trivial tuple a
deletion: the non-incremental batch oracle never saw an insert, and
multiplicity above 1 never arose. Raise max_weight to 3, matching every
other call site in the crate, so the tests cover insertions, deletions,
multiplicity, and mixed cancellation.
Also document the oracle's matched + unmatched - suppressed algebra, and
in particular why the unit weight of right_presence makes the
cancellation exact for signed weights. Replace plus(&suppressed.neg())
with minus(&suppressed), name the third closure clone suppressed_f for
symmetry with matched_f and unmatched_f, and give the assertions messages
that identify which oracle disagreed.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
nmarasoiu
marked this pull request as ready for review
August 13, 2026 17:35
Contributor
|
I think this could use a shorter commit message. |
Contributor
|
What in particular caused this PR? What do you find insufficient in the existing tests? |
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Add a non-incremental / batch oracle to the indexed left-join property tests.
The oracle integrates both inputs, computes matched rows with stream_join, derives right-key presence with stream_aggregate, and subtracts unmatched candidates whose keys occur on the right. It supports signed Z-set weights, including keys represented only by negative weights.
The existing reference implementation remains in place and checks left join through a composition of incremental operators. The new oracle recomputes from accumulated batches, independently covering the incrementalization behavior used by both ordinary and balanced left joins in per-step and transaction modes.
Describe Manual Test Plan
Checklist
Breaking Changes?
Mark if you think the answer is yes for any of these components:
Describe Incompatible Changes