-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2
make RewriteWithExpression idempotent #19
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
Conversation
// if it's ref count is 1. | ||
refToExpr(commonExprDef.id) = commonExprDef.child | ||
} else { | ||
val alias = Alias(commonExprDef.child, s"_common_expr_${commonExprDef.id}")() |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The reason I chose the expr definition index is to make the logical plan stable. Spark Connect has gold files test that record the logical plan. We can normalize the alias name there, but I think it's simpler to just don't use the def id here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I see and makes sense. Fixed in 50ecc13.
Thanks for the cleanup! I only have one comment. |
…eption ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? This pr reworks the group by map type to fix issues: - Can not bind reference excpetion at runtume since the attribute was wrapped by `MapSort` and we didi not transform the plan with new output - The add `MapSort` rule should be put before `PullOutGroupingExpressions` to avoid complex expr existing in grouping keys ### Why are the changes needed? To fix issues. for example: ``` select map(1, id) from range(10) group by map(1, id); [INTERNAL_ERROR] Couldn't find _groupingexpression#18 in [mapsort(_groupingexpression#18)#19] SQLSTATE: XX000 org.apache.spark.SparkException: [INTERNAL_ERROR] Couldn't find _groupingexpression#18 in [mapsort(_groupingexpression#18)#19] SQLSTATE: XX000 at org.apache.spark.SparkException$.internalError(SparkException.scala:92) at org.apache.spark.SparkException$.internalError(SparkException.scala:96) at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.expressions.BindReferences$$anonfun$bindReference$1.applyOrElse(BoundAttribute.scala:81) at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.expressions.BindReferences$$anonfun$bindReference$1.applyOrElse(BoundAttribute.scala:74) at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.trees.TreeNode.$anonfun$transformDownWithPruning$1(TreeNode.scala:470) ``` ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? no, not released ### How was this patch tested? improve the tests to add more cases ### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? no Closes apache#47545 from ulysses-you/maptype. Authored-by: ulysses-you <ulyssesyou18@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: youxiduo <youxiduo@corp.netease.com>
…IN-subquery ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? This PR adds code to `RewritePredicateSubquery#apply` to explicitly handle the case where an `Aggregate` node contains an aggregate expression in the left-hand operand of an IN-subquery expression. The explicit handler moves the IN-subquery expressions out of the `Aggregate` and into a parent `Project` node. The `Aggregate` will continue to perform the aggregations that were used as an operand to the IN-subquery expression, but will not include the IN-subquery expression itself. After pulling up IN-subquery expressions into a Project node, `RewritePredicateSubquery#apply` is called again to handle the `Project` as a `UnaryNode`. The `Join` will now be inserted between the `Project` and the `Aggregate` node, and the join condition will use an attribute rather than an aggregate expression, e.g.: ``` Project [col1#32, exists#42 AS (sum(col2) IN (listquery()))apache#40] +- Join ExistenceJoin(exists#42), (sum(col2)#41L = c2#39L) :- Aggregate [col1#32], [col1#32, sum(col2#33) AS sum(col2)#41L] : +- LocalRelation [col1#32, col2#33] +- LocalRelation [c2#39L] ``` `sum(col2)#41L` in the above join condition, despite how it looks, is the name of the attribute, not an aggregate expression. ### Why are the changes needed? The following query fails: ``` create or replace temp view v1(c1, c2) as values (1, 2), (1, 3), (2, 2), (3, 7), (3, 1); create or replace temp view v2(col1, col2) as values (1, 2), (1, 3), (2, 2), (3, 7), (3, 1); select col1, sum(col2) in (select c2 from v1) from v2 group by col1; ``` It fails with this error: ``` [INTERNAL_ERROR] Cannot generate code for expression: sum(input[1, int, false]) SQLSTATE: XX000 ``` With SPARK_TESTING=1, it fails with this error: ``` [PLAN_VALIDATION_FAILED_RULE_IN_BATCH] Rule org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.optimizer.RewritePredicateSubquery in batch RewriteSubquery generated an invalid plan: Special expressions are placed in the wrong plan: Aggregate [col1#11], [col1#11, first(exists#20, false) AS (sum(col2) IN (listquery()))#19] +- Join ExistenceJoin(exists#20), (sum(col2#12) = c2#18L) :- LocalRelation [col1#11, col2#12] +- LocalRelation [c2#18L] ``` The issue is that `RewritePredicateSubquery` builds a `Join` operator where the join condition contains an aggregate expression. The bug is in the handler for `UnaryNode` in `RewritePredicateSubquery#apply`, which adds a `Join` below the `Aggregate` and assumes that the left-hand operand of IN-subquery can be used in the join condition. This works fine for most cases, but not when the left-hand operand is an aggregate expression. This PR moves the offending IN-subqueries to a `Project` node, with the aggregates replaced by attributes referring to the aggregate expressions. The resulting join condition now uses those attributes rather than the actual aggregate expressions. ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? No, other than allowing this type of query to succeed. ### How was this patch tested? New unit tests. ### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? No. Closes apache#48627 from bersprockets/aggregate_in_set_issue. Authored-by: Bruce Robbins <bersprockets@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Wenchen Fan <wenchen@databricks.com>
…IN-subquery ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? This PR adds code to `RewritePredicateSubquery#apply` to explicitly handle the case where an `Aggregate` node contains an aggregate expression in the left-hand operand of an IN-subquery expression. The explicit handler moves the IN-subquery expressions out of the `Aggregate` and into a parent `Project` node. The `Aggregate` will continue to perform the aggregations that were used as an operand to the IN-subquery expression, but will not include the IN-subquery expression itself. After pulling up IN-subquery expressions into a Project node, `RewritePredicateSubquery#apply` is called again to handle the `Project` as a `UnaryNode`. The `Join` will now be inserted between the `Project` and the `Aggregate` node, and the join condition will use an attribute rather than an aggregate expression, e.g.: ``` Project [col1#32, exists#42 AS (sum(col2) IN (listquery()))apache#40] +- Join ExistenceJoin(exists#42), (sum(col2)#41L = c2#39L) :- Aggregate [col1#32], [col1#32, sum(col2#33) AS sum(col2)#41L] : +- LocalRelation [col1#32, col2#33] +- LocalRelation [c2#39L] ``` `sum(col2)#41L` in the above join condition, despite how it looks, is the name of the attribute, not an aggregate expression. ### Why are the changes needed? The following query fails: ``` create or replace temp view v1(c1, c2) as values (1, 2), (1, 3), (2, 2), (3, 7), (3, 1); create or replace temp view v2(col1, col2) as values (1, 2), (1, 3), (2, 2), (3, 7), (3, 1); select col1, sum(col2) in (select c2 from v1) from v2 group by col1; ``` It fails with this error: ``` [INTERNAL_ERROR] Cannot generate code for expression: sum(input[1, int, false]) SQLSTATE: XX000 ``` With SPARK_TESTING=1, it fails with this error: ``` [PLAN_VALIDATION_FAILED_RULE_IN_BATCH] Rule org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.optimizer.RewritePredicateSubquery in batch RewriteSubquery generated an invalid plan: Special expressions are placed in the wrong plan: Aggregate [col1#11], [col1#11, first(exists#20, false) AS (sum(col2) IN (listquery()))#19] +- Join ExistenceJoin(exists#20), (sum(col2#12) = c2#18L) :- LocalRelation [col1#11, col2#12] +- LocalRelation [c2#18L] ``` The issue is that `RewritePredicateSubquery` builds a `Join` operator where the join condition contains an aggregate expression. The bug is in the handler for `UnaryNode` in `RewritePredicateSubquery#apply`, which adds a `Join` below the `Aggregate` and assumes that the left-hand operand of IN-subquery can be used in the join condition. This works fine for most cases, but not when the left-hand operand is an aggregate expression. This PR moves the offending IN-subqueries to a `Project` node, with the aggregates replaced by attributes referring to the aggregate expressions. The resulting join condition now uses those attributes rather than the actual aggregate expressions. ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? No, other than allowing this type of query to succeed. ### How was this patch tested? New unit tests. ### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? No. Closes apache#48627 from bersprockets/aggregate_in_set_issue. Authored-by: Bruce Robbins <bersprockets@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Wenchen Fan <wenchen@databricks.com> (cherry picked from commit e02ff1c) Signed-off-by: Wenchen Fan <wenchen@databricks.com>
No description provided.