fix 3.0 cases releated to state window

[Tony2h]

Description

Please briefly describe the code changes in this pull request.

Jira: https://jira.taosdata.com:18080/browse/TD-

Checklist

Please check the items in the checklist if applicable.

• Is the user manual updated?
• Are the test cases passed and automated?
• Is there no significant decrease in test coverage?

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @Tony2h, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request addresses several issues related to state window operations in version 3.0, primarily focusing on the correct handling of duplicate timestamps. The changes ensure that window aggregation operators (count, event, and time windows) properly manage timestamps, preventing incorrect calculations or unexpected behavior when duplicate timestamps are present. Corresponding test cases have been updated to validate these fixes, including expecting errors for invalid state window queries and verifying the accuracy of aggregation results under the new logic.

Highlights

• Duplicate Timestamp Handling: Implemented logic in countwindowoperator.c, eventwindowoperator.c, and timewindowoperator.c to correctly record the last processed timestamp, ensuring proper behavior when duplicate timestamps are encountered in window aggregations.
• State Window Query Validation: Updated test_state_window.py to reflect that state window queries with duplicate timestamps should now result in an error, aligning with the corrected backend logic.
• Corrected Aggregation Results: Adjusted expected values in test_state_window_extend.py for various tdSql.checkData assertions, indicating that the aggregation calculations for state windows have been fixed and now produce accurate results.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request addresses issues related to state window aggregations by introducing checks to prevent duplicate timestamps, which is a crucial correctness fix. The changes across the C source files are consistent and logically sound. The test files have been updated accordingly to reflect this new behavior, including modifying a test to expect an error and adjusting test data to prevent the new error condition. Overall, the changes are well-implemented. I have one suggestion to improve test code maintainability by removing some duplicated test logic.

[gemini-code-assist]

The test logic and assertions for extend=0 (lines 404-451) are identical to the test for the default extend parameter (lines 354-401). Since the default value for extend is 0, these two test blocks are redundant. Consider removing one of them to reduce code duplication and improve maintainability.