[SPARK-48307][SQL] InlineCTE should keep not-inlined relations in the original WithCTE node #46617
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
amaliujia
reviewed
May 16, 2024
| outerCTEId.foreach { cteId => | ||
| val (_, _, outerRefMap) = cteMap(cteId) | ||
| outerRefMap(ref.cteId) += 1 | ||
| cteMap(cteId).recordOutgoingReference(ref.cteId) |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I personally like to not hide the +1 implementation details here as I had troubles to understand it.
Or the function name can be IncreaseOutgoingReferenceByOne?
LuciferYang
approved these changes
May 20, 2024
viirya
reviewed
May 20, 2024
sql/catalyst/src/test/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/optimizer/InlineCTESuite.scala
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Member
Repartition? Do you mean Relation? |
viirya
approved these changes
May 20, 2024
…mizer/InlineCTESuite.scala Co-authored-by: Liang-Chi Hsieh <[email protected]>
Contributor
Author
It's Reparition, because we rely on shuffle reuse to reuse CTE relations. |
Contributor
Author
|
thanks for the review, merging to master! |
cloud-fan
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 5, 2024
…CTE relations ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? This is a followup of #46617 . Subquery expression has a bunch of correlation checks which need to match certain plan shapes. We broke this by leaving `WithCTE` in the plan for un-referenced CTE relations. This PR fixes the issue by skipping CTE plan nodes in correlated subquery expression checks. ### Why are the changes needed? bug fix ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? no bug is not released yet. ### How was this patch tested? new tests ### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? no Closes #46869 from cloud-fan/check. Authored-by: Wenchen Fan <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Wenchen Fan <[email protected]>
cloud-fan
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 28, 2024
…d not fail ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? This is a follow-up of #46617 to fix a bug. When we re-construct the `WithCTE` node, we should use the new CTE definitions that have been applied `inlineCTE`. ### Why are the changes needed? bug fix, otherwise we may hit errors such as ``` java.util.NoSuchElementException: key not found: 0 at scala.collection.MapOps.default(Map.scala:289) at scala.collection.MapOps.default$(Map.scala:288) at scala.collection.AbstractMap.default(Map.scala:420) at scala.collection.mutable.HashMap.apply(HashMap.scala:440) at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.optimizer.PushdownPredicatesAndPruneColumnsForCTEDef$.gatherPredicatesAndAttributes(PushdownPredicatesAndPruneColumnsForCTEDef.scala:74) at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.optimizer.PushdownPredicatesAndPruneColumnsForCTEDef$.$anonfun$gatherPredicatesAndAttributes$1(PushdownPredicatesAndPruneColumnsForCTEDef.scala:68) at scala.collection.immutable.Vector.foreach(Vector.scala:2124) at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.optimizer.PushdownPredicatesAndPruneColumnsForCTEDef$.gatherPredicatesAndAttributes(PushdownPredicatesAndPruneColumnsForCTEDef.scala:67) ``` ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? no, the bug is not released yet ### How was this patch tested? new test ### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? no Closes #47141 from cloud-fan/fix. Lead-authored-by: Wenchen Fan <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Wenchen Fan <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Wenchen Fan <[email protected]>
Contributor
|
late LGTM |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 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?
I noticed an outdated comment in the rule
InlineCTEThis is not true anymore after #42036 . It's not a big deal as we replace not-inlined CTE relations with
Repartitionduring optimization, so it doesn't matter where we put theWithCTEnode with not-inlined CTE relations, as it will disappear eventually. But it's still better to keep it at its original place, as third-party rules may be sensitive about the plan shape.Why are the changes needed?
to keep the plan shape as much as can after inlining CTE relations.
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