fix(TablesPlot): join selected columns with a comma to emit valid Python

[kz930]

What changes were proposed in this PR?

Fixes invalid generated Python in TablesPlotOpDesc. getAttributes built the selected-column list by joining the rendered column names with the literal ',':

private def getAttributes: String =
  includedColumns.map(c => pyb"""${c.attributeName}""").mkString("','")

used as table.dropna(subset=[$attributes]) and table[[$attributes]].

Each pyb"""${c.attributeName}""" renders to a runtime-decoded call self.decode_python_template('<base64>'). Joining those with the literal ',' places a string literal immediately after a function call, which is a Python SyntaxError, so Tables Plot fails to run for any input:

table = table.dropna(subset=[self.decode_python_template('YQ==')','self.decode_python_template('Yg==')])

(YQ==/Yg== decode to a/b.)

Fix: join with a plain comma:

-  includedColumns.map(c => pyb"""${c.attributeName}""").mkString("','")
+  includedColumns.map(c => pyb"""${c.attributeName}""").mkString(",")

which yields the valid list:

subset=[self.decode_python_template('YQ=='),self.decode_python_template('Yg==')]

Any related issues, documentation, discussions?

Closes #6791

How was this PR tested?

Added a regression test to TablesPlotOpDescSpec that configures two columns, calls generatePythonCode(), and asserts:

• the columns are comma-joined (...('<b64>'),self.decode_python_template('<b64>')...), and
• the invalid ')',' sequence is absent.

Both assertions fail on main and pass with this change.

Ran the suite locally:

sbt "WorkflowOperator/testOnly org.apache.texera.amber.operator.visualization.tablesChart.TablesPlotOpDescSpec"
...
Tests: succeeded 5, failed 0, canceled 0, ignored 0, pending 0
All tests passed.

Was this PR authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?

Generated-by: Claude Code (Claude Opus 4.8)

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[github-actions]

Automated Reviewer Suggestions

Based on the git blame history of the changed files, we recommend the following reviewers:

• Contributors with relevant context: @eugenegujing
  You can notify them by mentioning @eugenegujing in a comment.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 75.41%. Comparing base (bf1f589) to head (7aa2c52).
⚠️ Report is 5 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main    #6806      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     75.41%   75.41%   -0.01%     
+ Complexity     3452     3451       -1     
============================================
  Files          1160     1160              
  Lines         45807    45806       -1     
  Branches       5071     5071              
============================================
- Hits          34544    34543       -1     
  Misses         9657     9657              
  Partials       1606     1606              

Flag	Coverage Δ		*Carryforward flag
access-control-service	70.00% <ø> (ø)
agent-service	76.76% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from ab92ab2
amber	67.21% <ø> (-0.01%)	⬇️	Carriedforward from ab92ab2
computing-unit-managing-service	20.49% <ø> (ø)
config-service	66.66% <ø> (ø)
file-service	67.21% <ø> (ø)
frontend	79.86% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from ab92ab2
notebook-migration-service	78.94% <ø> (ø)
pyamber	92.15% <ø> (ø)		Carriedforward from ab92ab2
workflow-compiling-service	55.14% <ø> (ø)

*This pull request uses carry forward flags. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[github-actions]

✅ No material benchmark regressions detected

🟢 5 better · 🔴 0 worse · ⚪ 10 noise (<±5%) · 0 without baseline

Compared against main fa075d1 benchmarked on this same runner, so the delta is largely free of cross-runner hardware noise. The "7d avg" column still reflects the gh-pages dashboard. Treat <±5% as noise unless repeated.

Dashboard · Run

	config	throughput	MB/s	latency	max Δ latest / 7d
🟢	bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	373	0.228	24,602/36,529/36,529 us	🟢 -5.6% / 🔴 +126.6%
🟢	bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	790	0.482	122,967/155,973/155,973 us	🟢 -8.1% / 🔴 +45.2%
🟢	bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	913	0.557	1,096,425/1,125,197/1,125,197 us	🟢 -6.2% / 🔴 +11.4%

Baseline details

Latest main fa075d1 from same runner

config	metric	PR	latest main	7d avg	Δ latest	Δ 7d
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	373 tuples/sec	380 tuples/sec	760.2 tuples/sec	-1.8%	-50.9%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.228 MB/s	0.232 MB/s	0.464 MB/s	-1.7%	-50.9%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p50	24,602 us	26,057 us	12,781 us	-5.6%	+92.5%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p95	36,529 us	35,532 us	16,118 us	+2.8%	+126.6%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p99	36,529 us	35,532 us	19,074 us	+2.8%	+91.5%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	790 tuples/sec	788 tuples/sec	988.68 tuples/sec	+0.3%	-20.1%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.482 MB/s	0.481 MB/s	0.603 MB/s	+0.2%	-20.1%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p50	122,967 us	120,649 us	101,448 us	+1.9%	+21.2%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p95	155,973 us	169,719 us	107,410 us	-8.1%	+45.2%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p99	155,973 us	169,719 us	120,258 us	-8.1%	+29.7%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	913 tuples/sec	910 tuples/sec	1,023 tuples/sec	+0.3%	-10.8%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.557 MB/s	0.555 MB/s	0.624 MB/s	+0.4%	-10.8%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p50	1,096,425 us	1,098,287 us	983,888 us	-0.2%	+11.4%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p95	1,125,197 us	1,199,383 us	1,030,100 us	-6.2%	+9.2%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p99	1,125,197 us	1,199,383 us	1,056,513 us	-6.2%	+6.5%

Raw CSV

config_idx,batch_size,schema_width,string_len,num_batches,total_ms,total_tuples,total_bytes,tuples_per_sec,mb_per_sec,lat_p50_us,lat_p95_us,lat_p99_us
0,10,10,64,20,535.76,200,128000,373,0.228,24602.44,36529.47,36529.47
1,100,10,64,20,2531.11,2000,1280000,790,0.482,122966.68,155972.50,155972.50
2,1000,10,64,20,21909.93,20000,12800000,913,0.557,1096424.60,1125197.30,1125197.30

[kz930]

@eugenegujing May you take a look at it please?

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

This PR fixes invalid Python code generation in the Tables Plot visualization operator (TablesPlotOpDesc) by correcting how selected column names are concatenated into Python list literals. This ensures the generated dropna(subset=[...]) and table[[...]] expressions are syntactically valid when multiple columns are selected.

Changes:

• Change getAttributes to join per-column pyb renderings with "," instead of the literal "','", avoiding SyntaxError in generated Python.
• Add a regression test asserting multi-column selection produces comma-joined decode_python_template(...) calls and does not contain the invalid ')',' sequence.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

File	Description
common/workflow-operator/src/main/scala/org/apache/texera/amber/operator/visualization/tablesChart/TablesPlotOpDesc.scala	Fix Python attribute-list concatenation to emit valid Python when multiple columns are selected.
common/workflow-operator/src/test/scala/org/apache/texera/amber/operator/visualization/tablesChart/TablesPlotOpDescSpec.scala	Add regression coverage for the multi-column comma-join behavior in generated Python.

---

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

[aglinxinyuan]

Please fix the format of the file.

[kz930]

Done — the assertion line exceeded the 100-column limit; wrapped it so scalafmtCheck passes.

[aglinxinyuan]

LGTM!