Skip to content

[fix](function) Fix window_funnel missing boundary events when window overflows at datetime upper bound - #67823

Open
Mryange wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:masterfrom
Mryange:fix-window-funnel-overflow
Open

[fix](function) Fix window_funnel missing boundary events when window overflows at datetime upper bound#67823
Mryange wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:masterfrom
Mryange:fix-window-funnel-overflow

Conversation

@Mryange

@Mryange Mryange commented Sep 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

For timestamps near the DATETIME upper bound (e.g. 9999-12-31 23:59:58), adding the sliding window seconds in date_add_interval<SECOND> overflows the date range. Both window_funnel and window_funnel_v2 ignored the false return value, leaving the window end timestamp at the starting point, so the boundary event inside the enlarged window was missed: window=1 returned 2 while window=10 returned 1.

Release note

None

Check List (For Author)

  • Test

    • Regression test
    • Unit Test
    • Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)
    • No need to test or manual test. Explain why:
      • This is a refactor/code format and no logic has been changed.
      • Previous test can cover this change.
      • No code files have been changed.
      • Other reason
  • Behavior changed:

    • No.
    • Yes.
  • Does this need documentation?

    • No.
    • Yes.

Check List (For Reviewer who merge this PR)

  • Confirm the release note
  • Confirm test cases
  • Confirm document
  • Add branch pick label

… overflows at datetime upper bound

Issue Number: N/A

Problem Summary: When the timestamp is near the DATETIME upper bound (e.g.
9999-12-31 23:59:58), adding the sliding window seconds in
`date_add_interval<SECOND>` overflows the date range. Both `window_funnel` (V1)
and `window_funnel_v2` ignored the `false` return value of
`date_add_interval`, leaving the window end timestamp unchanged at the starting
point, so the boundary event inside the enlarged window was missed: window=1
returned 2 while window=10 returned 1.

Fix: check the return value of `date_add_interval<SECOND>` in both V1 and V2 and
throw an OUT_OF_BOUND exception with the function name, start timestamp and
window seconds, instead of returning a wrong funnel level.

None

- Test:
    - [x] Unit Test
- Behavior changed: Yes. An exception is thrown when the window slides past the
  DATETIME upper bound, instead of silently returning a wrong result.
- Does this need documentation: No
@hello-stephen

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

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?

@Mryange

Mryange commented Sep 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

run buildall

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants