-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 28.3k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[SPARK-21332][SQL] Incorrect result type inferred for some decimal expressions #18583
Conversation
…cimal expressions
Test build #79458 has finished for PR 18583 at commit
|
Can we, please, trigger this one more time? |
Jenkins, retest this please |
Test build #79676 has finished for PR 18583 at commit
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
LGTM |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
…pressions ## What changes were proposed in this pull request? This PR changes the direction of expression transformation in the DecimalPrecision rule. Previously, the expressions were transformed down, which led to incorrect result types when decimal expressions had other decimal expressions as their operands. The root cause of this issue was in visiting outer nodes before their children. Consider the example below: ``` val inputSchema = StructType(StructField("col", DecimalType(26, 6)) :: Nil) val sc = spark.sparkContext val rdd = sc.parallelize(1 to 2).map(_ => Row(BigDecimal(12))) val df = spark.createDataFrame(rdd, inputSchema) // Works correctly since no nested decimal expression is involved // Expected result type: (26, 6) * (26, 6) = (38, 12) df.select($"col" * $"col").explain(true) df.select($"col" * $"col").printSchema() // Gives a wrong result since there is a nested decimal expression that should be visited first // Expected result type: ((26, 6) * (26, 6)) * (26, 6) = (38, 12) * (26, 6) = (38, 18) df.select($"col" * $"col" * $"col").explain(true) df.select($"col" * $"col" * $"col").printSchema() ``` The example above gives the following output: ``` // Correct result without sub-expressions == Parsed Logical Plan == 'Project [('col * 'col) AS (col * col)#4] +- LogicalRDD [col#1] == Analyzed Logical Plan == (col * col): decimal(38,12) Project [CheckOverflow((promote_precision(cast(col#1 as decimal(26,6))) * promote_precision(cast(col#1 as decimal(26,6)))), DecimalType(38,12)) AS (col * col)#4] +- LogicalRDD [col#1] == Optimized Logical Plan == Project [CheckOverflow((col#1 * col#1), DecimalType(38,12)) AS (col * col)#4] +- LogicalRDD [col#1] == Physical Plan == *Project [CheckOverflow((col#1 * col#1), DecimalType(38,12)) AS (col * col)#4] +- Scan ExistingRDD[col#1] // Schema root |-- (col * col): decimal(38,12) (nullable = true) // Incorrect result with sub-expressions == Parsed Logical Plan == 'Project [(('col * 'col) * 'col) AS ((col * col) * col)#11] +- LogicalRDD [col#1] == Analyzed Logical Plan == ((col * col) * col): decimal(38,12) Project [CheckOverflow((promote_precision(cast(CheckOverflow((promote_precision(cast(col#1 as decimal(26,6))) * promote_precision(cast(col#1 as decimal(26,6)))), DecimalType(38,12)) as decimal(26,6))) * promote_precision(cast(col#1 as decimal(26,6)))), DecimalType(38,12)) AS ((col * col) * col)#11] +- LogicalRDD [col#1] == Optimized Logical Plan == Project [CheckOverflow((cast(CheckOverflow((col#1 * col#1), DecimalType(38,12)) as decimal(26,6)) * col#1), DecimalType(38,12)) AS ((col * col) * col)#11] +- LogicalRDD [col#1] == Physical Plan == *Project [CheckOverflow((cast(CheckOverflow((col#1 * col#1), DecimalType(38,12)) as decimal(26,6)) * col#1), DecimalType(38,12)) AS ((col * col) * col)#11] +- Scan ExistingRDD[col#1] // Schema root |-- ((col * col) * col): decimal(38,12) (nullable = true) ``` ## How was this patch tested? This PR was tested with available unit tests. Moreover, there are tests to cover previously failing scenarios. Author: aokolnychyi <anton.okolnychyi@sap.com> Closes #18583 from aokolnychyi/spark-21332. (cherry picked from commit 0be5fb4) Signed-off-by: gatorsmile <gatorsmile@gmail.com>
…pressions ## What changes were proposed in this pull request? This PR changes the direction of expression transformation in the DecimalPrecision rule. Previously, the expressions were transformed down, which led to incorrect result types when decimal expressions had other decimal expressions as their operands. The root cause of this issue was in visiting outer nodes before their children. Consider the example below: ``` val inputSchema = StructType(StructField("col", DecimalType(26, 6)) :: Nil) val sc = spark.sparkContext val rdd = sc.parallelize(1 to 2).map(_ => Row(BigDecimal(12))) val df = spark.createDataFrame(rdd, inputSchema) // Works correctly since no nested decimal expression is involved // Expected result type: (26, 6) * (26, 6) = (38, 12) df.select($"col" * $"col").explain(true) df.select($"col" * $"col").printSchema() // Gives a wrong result since there is a nested decimal expression that should be visited first // Expected result type: ((26, 6) * (26, 6)) * (26, 6) = (38, 12) * (26, 6) = (38, 18) df.select($"col" * $"col" * $"col").explain(true) df.select($"col" * $"col" * $"col").printSchema() ``` The example above gives the following output: ``` // Correct result without sub-expressions == Parsed Logical Plan == 'Project [('col * 'col) AS (col * col)#4] +- LogicalRDD [col#1] == Analyzed Logical Plan == (col * col): decimal(38,12) Project [CheckOverflow((promote_precision(cast(col#1 as decimal(26,6))) * promote_precision(cast(col#1 as decimal(26,6)))), DecimalType(38,12)) AS (col * col)#4] +- LogicalRDD [col#1] == Optimized Logical Plan == Project [CheckOverflow((col#1 * col#1), DecimalType(38,12)) AS (col * col)#4] +- LogicalRDD [col#1] == Physical Plan == *Project [CheckOverflow((col#1 * col#1), DecimalType(38,12)) AS (col * col)#4] +- Scan ExistingRDD[col#1] // Schema root |-- (col * col): decimal(38,12) (nullable = true) // Incorrect result with sub-expressions == Parsed Logical Plan == 'Project [(('col * 'col) * 'col) AS ((col * col) * col)#11] +- LogicalRDD [col#1] == Analyzed Logical Plan == ((col * col) * col): decimal(38,12) Project [CheckOverflow((promote_precision(cast(CheckOverflow((promote_precision(cast(col#1 as decimal(26,6))) * promote_precision(cast(col#1 as decimal(26,6)))), DecimalType(38,12)) as decimal(26,6))) * promote_precision(cast(col#1 as decimal(26,6)))), DecimalType(38,12)) AS ((col * col) * col)#11] +- LogicalRDD [col#1] == Optimized Logical Plan == Project [CheckOverflow((cast(CheckOverflow((col#1 * col#1), DecimalType(38,12)) as decimal(26,6)) * col#1), DecimalType(38,12)) AS ((col * col) * col)#11] +- LogicalRDD [col#1] == Physical Plan == *Project [CheckOverflow((cast(CheckOverflow((col#1 * col#1), DecimalType(38,12)) as decimal(26,6)) * col#1), DecimalType(38,12)) AS ((col * col) * col)#11] +- Scan ExistingRDD[col#1] // Schema root |-- ((col * col) * col): decimal(38,12) (nullable = true) ``` ## How was this patch tested? This PR was tested with available unit tests. Moreover, there are tests to cover previously failing scenarios. Author: aokolnychyi <anton.okolnychyi@sap.com> Closes #18583 from aokolnychyi/spark-21332. (cherry picked from commit 0be5fb4) Signed-off-by: gatorsmile <gatorsmile@gmail.com>
…pressions ## What changes were proposed in this pull request? This PR changes the direction of expression transformation in the DecimalPrecision rule. Previously, the expressions were transformed down, which led to incorrect result types when decimal expressions had other decimal expressions as their operands. The root cause of this issue was in visiting outer nodes before their children. Consider the example below: ``` val inputSchema = StructType(StructField("col", DecimalType(26, 6)) :: Nil) val sc = spark.sparkContext val rdd = sc.parallelize(1 to 2).map(_ => Row(BigDecimal(12))) val df = spark.createDataFrame(rdd, inputSchema) // Works correctly since no nested decimal expression is involved // Expected result type: (26, 6) * (26, 6) = (38, 12) df.select($"col" * $"col").explain(true) df.select($"col" * $"col").printSchema() // Gives a wrong result since there is a nested decimal expression that should be visited first // Expected result type: ((26, 6) * (26, 6)) * (26, 6) = (38, 12) * (26, 6) = (38, 18) df.select($"col" * $"col" * $"col").explain(true) df.select($"col" * $"col" * $"col").printSchema() ``` The example above gives the following output: ``` // Correct result without sub-expressions == Parsed Logical Plan == 'Project [('col * 'col) AS (col * col)#4] +- LogicalRDD [col#1] == Analyzed Logical Plan == (col * col): decimal(38,12) Project [CheckOverflow((promote_precision(cast(col#1 as decimal(26,6))) * promote_precision(cast(col#1 as decimal(26,6)))), DecimalType(38,12)) AS (col * col)#4] +- LogicalRDD [col#1] == Optimized Logical Plan == Project [CheckOverflow((col#1 * col#1), DecimalType(38,12)) AS (col * col)#4] +- LogicalRDD [col#1] == Physical Plan == *Project [CheckOverflow((col#1 * col#1), DecimalType(38,12)) AS (col * col)#4] +- Scan ExistingRDD[col#1] // Schema root |-- (col * col): decimal(38,12) (nullable = true) // Incorrect result with sub-expressions == Parsed Logical Plan == 'Project [(('col * 'col) * 'col) AS ((col * col) * col)#11] +- LogicalRDD [col#1] == Analyzed Logical Plan == ((col * col) * col): decimal(38,12) Project [CheckOverflow((promote_precision(cast(CheckOverflow((promote_precision(cast(col#1 as decimal(26,6))) * promote_precision(cast(col#1 as decimal(26,6)))), DecimalType(38,12)) as decimal(26,6))) * promote_precision(cast(col#1 as decimal(26,6)))), DecimalType(38,12)) AS ((col * col) * col)#11] +- LogicalRDD [col#1] == Optimized Logical Plan == Project [CheckOverflow((cast(CheckOverflow((col#1 * col#1), DecimalType(38,12)) as decimal(26,6)) * col#1), DecimalType(38,12)) AS ((col * col) * col)#11] +- LogicalRDD [col#1] == Physical Plan == *Project [CheckOverflow((cast(CheckOverflow((col#1 * col#1), DecimalType(38,12)) as decimal(26,6)) * col#1), DecimalType(38,12)) AS ((col * col) * col)#11] +- Scan ExistingRDD[col#1] // Schema root |-- ((col * col) * col): decimal(38,12) (nullable = true) ``` ## How was this patch tested? This PR was tested with available unit tests. Moreover, there are tests to cover previously failing scenarios. Author: aokolnychyi <anton.okolnychyi@sap.com> Closes #18583 from aokolnychyi/spark-21332. (cherry picked from commit 0be5fb4) Signed-off-by: gatorsmile <gatorsmile@gmail.com>
Thanks! Merging to master/2.2/2.1/2.0 |
…pressions ## What changes were proposed in this pull request? This PR changes the direction of expression transformation in the DecimalPrecision rule. Previously, the expressions were transformed down, which led to incorrect result types when decimal expressions had other decimal expressions as their operands. The root cause of this issue was in visiting outer nodes before their children. Consider the example below: ``` val inputSchema = StructType(StructField("col", DecimalType(26, 6)) :: Nil) val sc = spark.sparkContext val rdd = sc.parallelize(1 to 2).map(_ => Row(BigDecimal(12))) val df = spark.createDataFrame(rdd, inputSchema) // Works correctly since no nested decimal expression is involved // Expected result type: (26, 6) * (26, 6) = (38, 12) df.select($"col" * $"col").explain(true) df.select($"col" * $"col").printSchema() // Gives a wrong result since there is a nested decimal expression that should be visited first // Expected result type: ((26, 6) * (26, 6)) * (26, 6) = (38, 12) * (26, 6) = (38, 18) df.select($"col" * $"col" * $"col").explain(true) df.select($"col" * $"col" * $"col").printSchema() ``` The example above gives the following output: ``` // Correct result without sub-expressions == Parsed Logical Plan == 'Project [('col * 'col) AS (col * col)#4] +- LogicalRDD [col#1] == Analyzed Logical Plan == (col * col): decimal(38,12) Project [CheckOverflow((promote_precision(cast(col#1 as decimal(26,6))) * promote_precision(cast(col#1 as decimal(26,6)))), DecimalType(38,12)) AS (col * col)#4] +- LogicalRDD [col#1] == Optimized Logical Plan == Project [CheckOverflow((col#1 * col#1), DecimalType(38,12)) AS (col * col)#4] +- LogicalRDD [col#1] == Physical Plan == *Project [CheckOverflow((col#1 * col#1), DecimalType(38,12)) AS (col * col)#4] +- Scan ExistingRDD[col#1] // Schema root |-- (col * col): decimal(38,12) (nullable = true) // Incorrect result with sub-expressions == Parsed Logical Plan == 'Project [(('col * 'col) * 'col) AS ((col * col) * col)#11] +- LogicalRDD [col#1] == Analyzed Logical Plan == ((col * col) * col): decimal(38,12) Project [CheckOverflow((promote_precision(cast(CheckOverflow((promote_precision(cast(col#1 as decimal(26,6))) * promote_precision(cast(col#1 as decimal(26,6)))), DecimalType(38,12)) as decimal(26,6))) * promote_precision(cast(col#1 as decimal(26,6)))), DecimalType(38,12)) AS ((col * col) * col)#11] +- LogicalRDD [col#1] == Optimized Logical Plan == Project [CheckOverflow((cast(CheckOverflow((col#1 * col#1), DecimalType(38,12)) as decimal(26,6)) * col#1), DecimalType(38,12)) AS ((col * col) * col)#11] +- LogicalRDD [col#1] == Physical Plan == *Project [CheckOverflow((cast(CheckOverflow((col#1 * col#1), DecimalType(38,12)) as decimal(26,6)) * col#1), DecimalType(38,12)) AS ((col * col) * col)#11] +- Scan ExistingRDD[col#1] // Schema root |-- ((col * col) * col): decimal(38,12) (nullable = true) ``` ## How was this patch tested? This PR was tested with available unit tests. Moreover, there are tests to cover previously failing scenarios. Author: aokolnychyi <anton.okolnychyi@sap.com> Closes apache#18583 from aokolnychyi/spark-21332. (cherry picked from commit 0be5fb4) Signed-off-by: gatorsmile <gatorsmile@gmail.com>
…pressions This PR changes the direction of expression transformation in the DecimalPrecision rule. Previously, the expressions were transformed down, which led to incorrect result types when decimal expressions had other decimal expressions as their operands. The root cause of this issue was in visiting outer nodes before their children. Consider the example below: ``` val inputSchema = StructType(StructField("col", DecimalType(26, 6)) :: Nil) val sc = spark.sparkContext val rdd = sc.parallelize(1 to 2).map(_ => Row(BigDecimal(12))) val df = spark.createDataFrame(rdd, inputSchema) // Works correctly since no nested decimal expression is involved // Expected result type: (26, 6) * (26, 6) = (38, 12) df.select($"col" * $"col").explain(true) df.select($"col" * $"col").printSchema() // Gives a wrong result since there is a nested decimal expression that should be visited first // Expected result type: ((26, 6) * (26, 6)) * (26, 6) = (38, 12) * (26, 6) = (38, 18) df.select($"col" * $"col" * $"col").explain(true) df.select($"col" * $"col" * $"col").printSchema() ``` The example above gives the following output: ``` // Correct result without sub-expressions == Parsed Logical Plan == 'Project [('col * 'col) AS (col * col)apache#4] +- LogicalRDD [col#1] == Analyzed Logical Plan == (col * col): decimal(38,12) Project [CheckOverflow((promote_precision(cast(col#1 as decimal(26,6))) * promote_precision(cast(col#1 as decimal(26,6)))), DecimalType(38,12)) AS (col * col)apache#4] +- LogicalRDD [col#1] == Optimized Logical Plan == Project [CheckOverflow((col#1 * col#1), DecimalType(38,12)) AS (col * col)apache#4] +- LogicalRDD [col#1] == Physical Plan == *Project [CheckOverflow((col#1 * col#1), DecimalType(38,12)) AS (col * col)apache#4] +- Scan ExistingRDD[col#1] // Schema root |-- (col * col): decimal(38,12) (nullable = true) // Incorrect result with sub-expressions == Parsed Logical Plan == 'Project [(('col * 'col) * 'col) AS ((col * col) * col)apache#11] +- LogicalRDD [col#1] == Analyzed Logical Plan == ((col * col) * col): decimal(38,12) Project [CheckOverflow((promote_precision(cast(CheckOverflow((promote_precision(cast(col#1 as decimal(26,6))) * promote_precision(cast(col#1 as decimal(26,6)))), DecimalType(38,12)) as decimal(26,6))) * promote_precision(cast(col#1 as decimal(26,6)))), DecimalType(38,12)) AS ((col * col) * col)apache#11] +- LogicalRDD [col#1] == Optimized Logical Plan == Project [CheckOverflow((cast(CheckOverflow((col#1 * col#1), DecimalType(38,12)) as decimal(26,6)) * col#1), DecimalType(38,12)) AS ((col * col) * col)apache#11] +- LogicalRDD [col#1] == Physical Plan == *Project [CheckOverflow((cast(CheckOverflow((col#1 * col#1), DecimalType(38,12)) as decimal(26,6)) * col#1), DecimalType(38,12)) AS ((col * col) * col)apache#11] +- Scan ExistingRDD[col#1] // Schema root |-- ((col * col) * col): decimal(38,12) (nullable = true) ``` This PR was tested with available unit tests. Moreover, there are tests to cover previously failing scenarios. Author: aokolnychyi <anton.okolnychyi@sap.com> Closes apache#18583 from aokolnychyi/spark-21332. (cherry picked from commit 0be5fb4) Signed-off-by: gatorsmile <gatorsmile@gmail.com>
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
This PR changes the direction of expression transformation in the DecimalPrecision rule. Previously, the expressions were transformed down, which led to incorrect result types when decimal expressions had other decimal expressions as their operands. The root cause of this issue was in visiting outer nodes before their children. Consider the example below:
The example above gives the following output:
How was this patch tested?
This PR was tested with available unit tests. Moreover, there are tests to cover previously failing scenarios.