[SPARK-46378][SQL] Still remove Sort after converting Aggregate to Project #44310
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Contributor
Author
beliefer
reviewed
Dec 12, 2023
| case Limit(le @ IntegerLiteral(1), a: Aggregate) if a.groupOnly => | ||
| Limit(le, Project(a.aggregateExpressions, LocalLimit(le, a.child))) | ||
| val project = Project(a.aggregateExpressions, LocalLimit(le, a.child)) | ||
| project.setTagValue(Project.dataOrderIrrelevantTag, ()) |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
According to the EliminateSorts, it's data order relevant if only group expressions.
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
it's irrelevant, see
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I missing the checkValidAggregateExpression.
ulysses-you
approved these changes
Dec 12, 2023
Contributor
Author
|
thanks for the review, merging to master! |
cloud-fan
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 21, 2023
### What changes were proposed in this pull request? This is a followup of #44310 . It turns out that `TreeNodeTag` in `Project` is way too fragile. `Project` is a very basic node and very easy to get removed/transformed during plan optimization. This PR switches to a different approach: since we can't retain the information (input data order doesn't matter) from `Aggregate`, let's leverage this information immediately. We pull out the expensive part of `EliminateSorts` to a new rule, so that we can safely call `EliminateSorts` right before we turn `Aggregate` into `Project`. ### Why are the changes needed? to make the optimizer more robust. ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? no ### How was this patch tested? existing tests ### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? no Closes #44429 from cloud-fan/sort. Authored-by: Wenchen Fan <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Wenchen Fan <[email protected]>
szehon-ho
pushed a commit
to szehon-ho/spark
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 7, 2024
…oject ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? This is a follow-up of apache#33397 to avoid sub-optimal plans. After converting `Aggregate` to `Project`, there is information lost: `Aggregate` doesn't care about the data order of inputs, but `Project` cares. `EliminateSorts` can remove `Sort` below `Aggregate`, but it doesn't work anymore if we convert `Aggregate` to `Project`. This PR fixes this issue by tagging the `Project` to be order-irrelevant if it's converted from `Aggregate`. Then `EliminateSorts` optimizes the tagged `Project`. ### Why are the changes needed? avoid sub-optimal plans ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? No ### How was this patch tested? new test ### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? No Closes apache#44310 from cloud-fan/sort. Authored-by: Wenchen Fan <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Wenchen Fan <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
5 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
This is a follow-up of #33397 to avoid sub-optimal plans. After converting
AggregatetoProject, there is information lost:Aggregatedoesn't care about the data order of inputs, butProjectcares.EliminateSortscan removeSortbelowAggregate, but it doesn't work anymore if we convertAggregatetoProject.This PR fixes this issue by tagging the
Projectto be order-irrelevant if it's converted fromAggregate. ThenEliminateSortsoptimizes the taggedProject.Why are the changes needed?
avoid sub-optimal plans
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No
How was this patch tested?
new test
Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
No