Cleanup

dbt-labs · May 12, 2024 · a714e4e · a714e4e
1 parent a7227f1
commit a714e4e
Show file tree

Hide file tree

Showing 3 changed files with 6 additions and 14 deletions.
diff --git a/metricflow-semantics/metricflow_semantics/query/query_resolver.py b/metricflow-semantics/metricflow_semantics/query/query_resolver.py
@@ -533,8 +533,6 @@ def _resolve_query(self, resolver_input_for_query: ResolverInputForQuery) -> Met
         semantic_models_in_group_by_items = set(
             resolve_group_by_item_result.linkable_element_set.derived_from_semantic_models
         )
-        print(resolve_group_by_item_result.linkable_element_set)
-        print(semantic_models_in_group_by_items)
         semantic_models_in_filters = set(
             itertools.chain.from_iterable(
                 filter_spec_resolution.resolved_linkable_element_set.derived_from_semantic_models

diff --git a/metricflow/dataflow/builder/dataflow_plan_builder.py b/metricflow/dataflow/builder/dataflow_plan_builder.py
@@ -835,8 +835,6 @@ def _find_dataflow_recipe(
         else:
             candidate_nodes_for_right_side_of_join += list(self._source_node_set.source_nodes_for_group_by_item_queries)
             candidate_nodes_for_left_side_of_join += list(
-                # Narrow to those where entity is primary key, if applicable? seems wrong.
-                # What happens if we query just 'listing'?
                 self._select_source_nodes_with_linkable_specs(
                     linkable_specs=linkable_spec_set,
                     source_nodes=self._source_node_set.source_nodes_for_group_by_item_queries,
@@ -912,7 +910,6 @@ def _find_dataflow_recipe(
         # Dict from the node that contains the source node to the evaluation results.
         node_to_evaluation: Dict[DataflowPlanNode, LinkableInstanceSatisfiabilityEvaluation] = {}
 
-        # We no longer sort by joins required? Is that the problem?
         for node in self._sort_by_suitability(candidate_nodes_for_left_side_of_join):
             data_set = self._node_data_set_resolver.get_output_data_set(node)
 
@@ -1402,12 +1399,12 @@ def _build_aggregated_measure_from_measure_source_node(
         if non_additive_dimension_spec is not None:
             # Apply semi additive join on the node
             agg_time_dimension = measure_properties.agg_time_dimension
-            queried_time_dimension_spec: Optional[TimeDimensionSpec] = (
-                self._find_non_additive_dimension_in_linkable_specs(
-                    agg_time_dimension=agg_time_dimension,
-                    linkable_specs=queried_linkable_specs.as_tuple,
-                    non_additive_dimension_spec=non_additive_dimension_spec,
-                )
+            queried_time_dimension_spec: Optional[
+                TimeDimensionSpec
+            ] = self._find_non_additive_dimension_in_linkable_specs(
+                agg_time_dimension=agg_time_dimension,
+                linkable_specs=queried_linkable_specs.as_tuple,
+                non_additive_dimension_spec=non_additive_dimension_spec,
             )
             time_dimension_spec = TimeDimensionSpec.from_name(non_additive_dimension_spec.name)
             window_groupings = tuple(

diff --git a/tests_metricflow/integration/test_cases/itest_dimensions.yaml b/tests_metricflow/integration/test_cases/itest_dimensions.yaml
@@ -349,9 +349,6 @@ integration_test:
   name: distinct_values_query_with_metric_filter
   description: Query without metrics using a metric filter
   model: SIMPLE_MODEL
-  # How do we specify that we want listing from the listings table?
-  # When querying entities, should we prioritize using tables where the entity is a primary key (if not specified)?
-  # Are we prioritizing the left node appropriately in the DFP for distinct values queries?
   group_bys: ["listing"]
   where_filter: "{{ render_metric_template('bookings', ['listing']) }} > 2"
   check_query: |