Skip to content

Conversation

@gengliangwang
Copy link

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

Why are the changes needed?

Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?

How was this patch tested?

@HyukjinKwon
Copy link
Owner

apache#32193 merged. Closing

HyukjinKwon pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 23, 2022
### What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Currently, Spark DS V2 aggregate push-down doesn't supports project with alias.

Refer https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/c91c2e9afec0d5d5bbbd2e155057fe409c5bb928/sql/core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/execution/datasources/v2/V2ScanRelationPushDown.scala#L96

This PR let it works good with alias.

**The first example:**
the origin plan show below:
```
Aggregate [DEPT#0], [DEPT#0, sum(mySalary#8) AS total#14]
+- Project [DEPT#0, SALARY#2 AS mySalary#8]
   +- ScanBuilderHolder [DEPT#0, NAME#1, SALARY#2, BONUS#3], RelationV2[DEPT#0, NAME#1, SALARY#2, BONUS#3] test.employee, JDBCScanBuilder(org.apache.spark.sql.test.TestSparkSession77978658,StructType(StructField(DEPT,IntegerType,true),StructField(NAME,StringType,true),StructField(SALARY,DecimalType(20,2),true),StructField(BONUS,DoubleType,true)),org.apache.spark.sql.execution.datasources.jdbc.JDBCOptions5f8da82)
```
If we can complete push down the aggregate, then the plan will be:
```
Project [DEPT#0, SUM(SALARY)#18 AS sum(SALARY#2)#13 AS total#14]
+- RelationV2[DEPT#0, SUM(SALARY)#18] test.employee
```
If we can partial push down the aggregate, then the plan will be:
```
Aggregate [DEPT#0], [DEPT#0, sum(cast(SUM(SALARY)#18 as decimal(20,2))) AS total#14]
+- RelationV2[DEPT#0, SUM(SALARY)#18] test.employee
```

**The second example:**
the origin plan show below:
```
Aggregate [myDept#33], [myDept#33, sum(mySalary#34) AS total#40]
+- Project [DEPT#25 AS myDept#33, SALARY#27 AS mySalary#34]
   +- ScanBuilderHolder [DEPT#25, NAME#26, SALARY#27, BONUS#28], RelationV2[DEPT#25, NAME#26, SALARY#27, BONUS#28] test.employee, JDBCScanBuilder(org.apache.spark.sql.test.TestSparkSession25c4f621,StructType(StructField(DEPT,IntegerType,true),StructField(NAME,StringType,true),StructField(SALARY,DecimalType(20,2),true),StructField(BONUS,DoubleType,true)),org.apache.spark.sql.execution.datasources.jdbc.JDBCOptions345d641e)
```
If we can complete push down the aggregate, then the plan will be:
```
Project [DEPT#25 AS myDept#33, SUM(SALARY)#44 AS sum(SALARY#27)#39 AS total#40]
+- RelationV2[DEPT#25, SUM(SALARY)#44] test.employee
```
If we can partial push down the aggregate, then the plan will be:
```
Aggregate [myDept#33], [DEPT#25 AS myDept#33, sum(cast(SUM(SALARY)apache#56 as decimal(20,2))) AS total#52]
+- RelationV2[DEPT#25, SUM(SALARY)apache#56] test.employee
```

### Why are the changes needed?
Alias is more useful.

### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
'Yes'.
Users could see DS V2 aggregate push-down supports project with alias.

### How was this patch tested?
New tests.

Closes apache#35932 from beliefer/SPARK-38533_new.

Authored-by: Jiaan Geng <beliefer@163.com>
Signed-off-by: Wenchen Fan <wenchen@databricks.com>
HyukjinKwon pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 27, 2022
### What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Currently, Spark DS V2 aggregate push-down doesn't supports project with alias.

Refer https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/c91c2e9afec0d5d5bbbd2e155057fe409c5bb928/sql/core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/execution/datasources/v2/V2ScanRelationPushDown.scala#L96

This PR let it works good with alias.

**The first example:**
the origin plan show below:
```
Aggregate [DEPT#0], [DEPT#0, sum(mySalary#8) AS total#14]
+- Project [DEPT#0, SALARY#2 AS mySalary#8]
   +- ScanBuilderHolder [DEPT#0, NAME#1, SALARY#2, BONUS#3], RelationV2[DEPT#0, NAME#1, SALARY#2, BONUS#3] test.employee, JDBCScanBuilder(org.apache.spark.sql.test.TestSparkSession77978658,StructType(StructField(DEPT,IntegerType,true),StructField(NAME,StringType,true),StructField(SALARY,DecimalType(20,2),true),StructField(BONUS,DoubleType,true)),org.apache.spark.sql.execution.datasources.jdbc.JDBCOptions5f8da82)
```
If we can complete push down the aggregate, then the plan will be:
```
Project [DEPT#0, SUM(SALARY)#18 AS sum(SALARY#2)#13 AS total#14]
+- RelationV2[DEPT#0, SUM(SALARY)#18] test.employee
```
If we can partial push down the aggregate, then the plan will be:
```
Aggregate [DEPT#0], [DEPT#0, sum(cast(SUM(SALARY)#18 as decimal(20,2))) AS total#14]
+- RelationV2[DEPT#0, SUM(SALARY)#18] test.employee
```

**The second example:**
the origin plan show below:
```
Aggregate [myDept#33], [myDept#33, sum(mySalary#34) AS total#40]
+- Project [DEPT#25 AS myDept#33, SALARY#27 AS mySalary#34]
   +- ScanBuilderHolder [DEPT#25, NAME#26, SALARY#27, BONUS#28], RelationV2[DEPT#25, NAME#26, SALARY#27, BONUS#28] test.employee, JDBCScanBuilder(org.apache.spark.sql.test.TestSparkSession25c4f621,StructType(StructField(DEPT,IntegerType,true),StructField(NAME,StringType,true),StructField(SALARY,DecimalType(20,2),true),StructField(BONUS,DoubleType,true)),org.apache.spark.sql.execution.datasources.jdbc.JDBCOptions345d641e)
```
If we can complete push down the aggregate, then the plan will be:
```
Project [DEPT#25 AS myDept#33, SUM(SALARY)#44 AS sum(SALARY#27)#39 AS total#40]
+- RelationV2[DEPT#25, SUM(SALARY)#44] test.employee
```
If we can partial push down the aggregate, then the plan will be:
```
Aggregate [myDept#33], [DEPT#25 AS myDept#33, sum(cast(SUM(SALARY)apache#56 as decimal(20,2))) AS total#52]
+- RelationV2[DEPT#25, SUM(SALARY)apache#56] test.employee
```

### Why are the changes needed?
Alias is more useful.

### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
'Yes'.
Users could see DS V2 aggregate push-down supports project with alias.

### How was this patch tested?
New tests.

Closes apache#35932 from beliefer/SPARK-38533_new.

Authored-by: Jiaan Geng <beliefer@163.com>
Signed-off-by: Wenchen Fan <wenchen@databricks.com>
(cherry picked from commit f327dad)
Signed-off-by: Wenchen Fan <wenchen@databricks.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants