-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 28.6k
[SPARK-28148][SQL] Repartition after join is not optimized away #27096
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
Closed
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
52 changes: 52 additions & 0 deletions
52
sql/core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/execution/exchange/PruneShuffleAndSort.scala
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
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@ | ||
/* | ||
* Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one or more | ||
* contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file distributed with | ||
* this work for additional information regarding copyright ownership. | ||
* The ASF licenses this file to You under the Apache License, Version 2.0 | ||
* (the "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance with | ||
* the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at | ||
* | ||
* http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 | ||
* | ||
* Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software | ||
* distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, | ||
* WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. | ||
* See the License for the specific language governing permissions and | ||
* limitations under the License. | ||
*/ | ||
|
||
package org.apache.spark.sql.execution.exchange | ||
|
||
import org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.expressions.SortOrder | ||
import org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.plans.physical.{HashPartitioning, PartitioningCollection} | ||
import org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.rules.Rule | ||
import org.apache.spark.sql.execution.{SortExec, SparkPlan} | ||
|
||
/** | ||
* Removes unnecessary shuffles and sorts after new ones are introduced by [[Rule]]s for | ||
* [[SparkPlan]]s, such as [[EnsureRequirements]]. | ||
*/ | ||
case class PruneShuffleAndSort() extends Rule[SparkPlan] { | ||
|
||
override def apply(plan: SparkPlan): SparkPlan = { | ||
plan.transformUp { | ||
case operator @ ShuffleExchangeExec(upper: HashPartitioning, child, _) => | ||
child.outputPartitioning match { | ||
case lower: HashPartitioning if upper.semanticEquals(lower) => child | ||
case _ @ PartitioningCollection(partitionings) => | ||
if (partitionings.exists{ | ||
case lower: HashPartitioning => upper.semanticEquals(lower) | ||
case _ => false | ||
}) { | ||
child | ||
} else { | ||
operator | ||
} | ||
case _ => operator | ||
} | ||
case SortExec(upper, false, child, _) | ||
if SortOrder.orderingSatisfies(child.outputOrdering, upper) => child | ||
case subPlan: SparkPlan => subPlan | ||
} | ||
} | ||
} |
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
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.
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.
Why doesn't this apply to
RangeParititoning
? Is it just we assumerepartition()
would only doHashPartitioning
?And what happens if someone does
df1.join(df2, Seq("id"), "left").repartition(100, df("some_other_column")).repartition(20, df1("id"))
ordf1.join(df2, Seq("id"), "left").sortWithinPartition(df1("some_other_column")).sortWithinPartition(df1("id"))
? We should be able to optimize that out too, right? It would be nice to make this rule more general and cover a wider range of cases.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.
Thanks for providing feedback.
Let me take a look into your specific examples and think a little more about it.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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.
@maryannxue
This PR focused on fixing removing unnecessary sorting and shuffling after a join, which potentially includes its own ShuffleExchangeExec with HashPartioning. Both cases you mentioned are already optimized properly: the shuffling on "some_other_column" is removed and all sortWithinPartitions are removed (due to previous optimizations in logical plan, and the optimizations introduced here)
I wouldn't mind generalizing to all Partitioning types of the ShuffleExchangeExec, but I am not sure how to compare two partitioning types for equality. You can see the special case for HashPartitioning in this PR.
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.
@maryannxue ping