Skip to content

feat(plan): expose bind::logical for deployment-forced fallback - #154

Merged
zzylol merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
feat/expose-bind-logical
Jul 22, 2026
Merged

zzylol merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
feat/expose-bind-logical

Conversation

@zzylol

@zzylol zzylol commented Jul 22, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Summary

Follow-up to #146 — that PR merged with only the size_params hook commit; this one carries the second commit that was pushed to the same branch afterward but landed after the merge, so it never made it to main.

A deployment sometimes knows implement_tree_in_with would otherwise actively bind a node to an Implementation it can't actually serve (e.g. an accumulator kind the deployment's runtime doesn't implement yet) — it needs to force that one node through the same Logical fallback this crate's own dispatch uses, without duplicating the schema-lift plumbing. Widens bind::logical's visibility (fnpub fn) to make that possible.

Needed by ASAPQuery-backend#408 (control_plane's Step B migration onto asap_sketch::L4Node), which uses asap_plan::bind::logical to force a Count{Exact} node to stay unbound (that deployment's data plane has no Count accumulator).

Test plan

  • cargo test -p asap-plan — 26 passed, no change in behavior (pure visibility widening)
  • cargo clippy -p asap-plan --all-targets — clean

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

A deployment sometimes knows implement_tree_in_with would otherwise
actively bind a node to an Implementation it can't actually serve (e.g.
an accumulator kind the deployment's runtime doesn't implement yet) --
it needs to force that one node through the same Logical fallback this
crate's own dispatch uses, without duplicating the schema-lift plumbing.
Widen logical()'s visibility to make that possible.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@zzylol
zzylol merged commit 01745cc into main Jul 22, 2026
1 check passed
@zzylol
zzylol deleted the feat/expose-bind-logical branch July 22, 2026 14:35
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.

1 participant