[SC-488] [WIP] Make TungstenAggregate supports aggregate functions that do not support code-gen#7
Closed
[SC-488] [WIP] Make TungstenAggregate supports aggregate functions that do not support code-gen#7
Conversation
Owner
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@yhuai, I noticed that this case (in the old code, too) used transform instead of transformDown. Any significance to that?
JoshRosen
force-pushed
the
support-interpreted-in-tungsten-agg-take-3
branch
3 times, most recently
from
4000734 to
fb0daa1
Compare
… aggregate functions, too.
JoshRosen
force-pushed
the
support-interpreted-in-tungsten-agg-take-3
branch
from
b50811d to
bb2f65a
Compare
Owner
Author
Owner
Author
|
I spotted the problem late last night. The issue is that when we switch back to sorting we need to re-initialize the inputAggBufferOffsets and mutableAggBufferOffsets of the interpreted aggregates. |
Owner
Author
|
Bam, all tests are now passing. Will submit a PR to Spark after my current refactoring PR is merged. |
|
woot! |
Owner
Author
|
Closing this now that my other PR has been merged. Will open a new PR against apache/spark to review the latest changes here. |
JoshRosen
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 9, 2016
## What changes were proposed in this pull request?
This PR aims to optimize GroupExpressions by removing repeating expressions. `RemoveRepetitionFromGroupExpressions` is added.
**Before**
```scala
scala> sql("select a+1 from values 1,2 T(a) group by a+1, 1+a, A+1, 1+A").explain()
== Physical Plan ==
WholeStageCodegen
: +- TungstenAggregate(key=[(a#0 + 1)#6,(1 + a#0)#7,(A#0 + 1)#8,(1 + A#0)#9], functions=[], output=[(a + 1)#5])
: +- INPUT
+- Exchange hashpartitioning((a#0 + 1)#6, (1 + a#0)#7, (A#0 + 1)#8, (1 + A#0)#9, 200), None
+- WholeStageCodegen
: +- TungstenAggregate(key=[(a#0 + 1) AS (a#0 + 1)#6,(1 + a#0) AS (1 + a#0)#7,(A#0 + 1) AS (A#0 + 1)#8,(1 + A#0) AS (1 + A#0)#9], functions=[], output=[(a#0 + 1)#6,(1 + a#0)#7,(A#0 + 1)#8,(1 + A#0)#9])
: +- INPUT
+- LocalTableScan [a#0], [[1],[2]]
```
**After**
```scala
scala> sql("select a+1 from values 1,2 T(a) group by a+1, 1+a, A+1, 1+A").explain()
== Physical Plan ==
WholeStageCodegen
: +- TungstenAggregate(key=[(a#0 + 1)#6], functions=[], output=[(a + 1)#5])
: +- INPUT
+- Exchange hashpartitioning((a#0 + 1)#6, 200), None
+- WholeStageCodegen
: +- TungstenAggregate(key=[(a#0 + 1) AS (a#0 + 1)#6], functions=[], output=[(a#0 + 1)#6])
: +- INPUT
+- LocalTableScan [a#0], [[1],[2]]
```
## How was this patch tested?
Pass the Jenkins tests (with a new testcase)
Author: Dongjoon Hyun <dongjoon@apache.org>
Closes apache#12590 from dongjoon-hyun/SPARK-14830.
JoshRosen
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 28, 2016
## What changes were proposed in this pull request?
This PR aims to optimize GroupExpressions by removing repeating expressions. `RemoveRepetitionFromGroupExpressions` is added.
**Before**
```scala
scala> sql("select a+1 from values 1,2 T(a) group by a+1, 1+a, A+1, 1+A").explain()
== Physical Plan ==
WholeStageCodegen
: +- TungstenAggregate(key=[(a#0 + 1)#6,(1 + a#0)#7,(A#0 + 1)#8,(1 + A#0)#9], functions=[], output=[(a + 1)#5])
: +- INPUT
+- Exchange hashpartitioning((a#0 + 1)#6, (1 + a#0)#7, (A#0 + 1)#8, (1 + A#0)#9, 200), None
+- WholeStageCodegen
: +- TungstenAggregate(key=[(a#0 + 1) AS (a#0 + 1)#6,(1 + a#0) AS (1 + a#0)#7,(A#0 + 1) AS (A#0 + 1)#8,(1 + A#0) AS (1 + A#0)#9], functions=[], output=[(a#0 + 1)#6,(1 + a#0)#7,(A#0 + 1)#8,(1 + A#0)#9])
: +- INPUT
+- LocalTableScan [a#0], [[1],[2]]
```
**After**
```scala
scala> sql("select a+1 from values 1,2 T(a) group by a+1, 1+a, A+1, 1+A").explain()
== Physical Plan ==
WholeStageCodegen
: +- TungstenAggregate(key=[(a#0 + 1)#6], functions=[], output=[(a + 1)#5])
: +- INPUT
+- Exchange hashpartitioning((a#0 + 1)#6, 200), None
+- WholeStageCodegen
: +- TungstenAggregate(key=[(a#0 + 1) AS (a#0 + 1)#6], functions=[], output=[(a#0 + 1)#6])
: +- INPUT
+- LocalTableScan [a#0], [[1],[2]]
```
## How was this patch tested?
Pass the Jenkins tests (with a new testcase)
Author: Dongjoon Hyun <dongjoon@apache.org>
Closes apache#12590 from dongjoon-hyun/SPARK-14830.
(cherry picked from commit 6e63201)
Signed-off-by: Michael Armbrust <michael@databricks.com>
JoshRosen
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 4, 2024
…n properly
### What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Make `ResolveRelations` handle plan id properly
### Why are the changes needed?
bug fix for Spark Connect, it won't affect classic Spark SQL
before this PR:
```
from pyspark.sql import functions as sf
spark.range(10).withColumn("value_1", sf.lit(1)).write.saveAsTable("test_table_1")
spark.range(10).withColumnRenamed("id", "index").withColumn("value_2", sf.lit(2)).write.saveAsTable("test_table_2")
df1 = spark.read.table("test_table_1")
df2 = spark.read.table("test_table_2")
df3 = spark.read.table("test_table_1")
join1 = df1.join(df2, on=df1.id==df2.index).select(df2.index, df2.value_2)
join2 = df3.join(join1, how="left", on=join1.index==df3.id)
join2.schema
```
fails with
```
AnalysisException: [CANNOT_RESOLVE_DATAFRAME_COLUMN] Cannot resolve dataframe column "id". It's probably because of illegal references like `df1.select(df2.col("a"))`. SQLSTATE: 42704
```
That is due to existing plan caching in `ResolveRelations` doesn't work with Spark Connect
```
=== Applying Rule org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.analysis.Analyzer$ResolveRelations ===
'[apache#12]Join LeftOuter, '`==`('index, 'id) '[apache#12]Join LeftOuter, '`==`('index, 'id)
!:- '[#9]UnresolvedRelation [test_table_1], [], false :- '[#9]SubqueryAlias spark_catalog.default.test_table_1
!+- '[apache#11]Project ['index, 'value_2] : +- 'UnresolvedCatalogRelation `spark_catalog`.`default`.`test_table_1`, [], false
! +- '[#10]Join Inner, '`==`('id, 'index) +- '[apache#11]Project ['index, 'value_2]
! :- '[#7]UnresolvedRelation [test_table_1], [], false +- '[#10]Join Inner, '`==`('id, 'index)
! +- '[#8]UnresolvedRelation [test_table_2], [], false :- '[#9]SubqueryAlias spark_catalog.default.test_table_1
! : +- 'UnresolvedCatalogRelation `spark_catalog`.`default`.`test_table_1`, [], false
! +- '[#8]SubqueryAlias spark_catalog.default.test_table_2
! +- 'UnresolvedCatalogRelation `spark_catalog`.`default`.`test_table_2`, [], false
Can not resolve 'id with plan 7
```
`[#7]UnresolvedRelation [test_table_1], [], false` was wrongly resolved to the cached one
```
:- '[#9]SubqueryAlias spark_catalog.default.test_table_1
+- 'UnresolvedCatalogRelation `spark_catalog`.`default`.`test_table_1`, [], false
```
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
yes, bug fix
### How was this patch tested?
added ut
### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
ci
Closes apache#45214 from zhengruifeng/connect_fix_read_join.
Authored-by: Ruifeng Zheng <ruifengz@apache.org>
Signed-off-by: Dongjoon Hyun <dhyun@apple.com>
JoshRosen
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 2, 2024
…plan properly ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? Make `ResolveRelations` handle plan id properly cherry-pick bugfix apache#45214 to 3.5 ### Why are the changes needed? bug fix for Spark Connect, it won't affect classic Spark SQL before this PR: ``` from pyspark.sql import functions as sf spark.range(10).withColumn("value_1", sf.lit(1)).write.saveAsTable("test_table_1") spark.range(10).withColumnRenamed("id", "index").withColumn("value_2", sf.lit(2)).write.saveAsTable("test_table_2") df1 = spark.read.table("test_table_1") df2 = spark.read.table("test_table_2") df3 = spark.read.table("test_table_1") join1 = df1.join(df2, on=df1.id==df2.index).select(df2.index, df2.value_2) join2 = df3.join(join1, how="left", on=join1.index==df3.id) join2.schema ``` fails with ``` AnalysisException: [CANNOT_RESOLVE_DATAFRAME_COLUMN] Cannot resolve dataframe column "id". It's probably because of illegal references like `df1.select(df2.col("a"))`. SQLSTATE: 42704 ``` That is due to existing plan caching in `ResolveRelations` doesn't work with Spark Connect ``` === Applying Rule org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.analysis.Analyzer$ResolveRelations === '[apache#12]Join LeftOuter, '`==`('index, 'id) '[apache#12]Join LeftOuter, '`==`('index, 'id) !:- '[#9]UnresolvedRelation [test_table_1], [], false :- '[#9]SubqueryAlias spark_catalog.default.test_table_1 !+- '[apache#11]Project ['index, 'value_2] : +- 'UnresolvedCatalogRelation `spark_catalog`.`default`.`test_table_1`, [], false ! +- '[#10]Join Inner, '`==`('id, 'index) +- '[apache#11]Project ['index, 'value_2] ! :- '[#7]UnresolvedRelation [test_table_1], [], false +- '[#10]Join Inner, '`==`('id, 'index) ! +- '[#8]UnresolvedRelation [test_table_2], [], false :- '[#9]SubqueryAlias spark_catalog.default.test_table_1 ! : +- 'UnresolvedCatalogRelation `spark_catalog`.`default`.`test_table_1`, [], false ! +- '[#8]SubqueryAlias spark_catalog.default.test_table_2 ! +- 'UnresolvedCatalogRelation `spark_catalog`.`default`.`test_table_2`, [], false Can not resolve 'id with plan 7 ``` `[#7]UnresolvedRelation [test_table_1], [], false` was wrongly resolved to the cached one ``` :- '[#9]SubqueryAlias spark_catalog.default.test_table_1 +- 'UnresolvedCatalogRelation `spark_catalog`.`default`.`test_table_1`, [], false ``` ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? yes, bug fix ### How was this patch tested? added ut ### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? ci Closes apache#46291 from zhengruifeng/connect_fix_read_join_35. Authored-by: Ruifeng Zheng <ruifengz@apache.org> Signed-off-by: Ruifeng Zheng <ruifengz@apache.org>
JoshRosen
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 2, 2024
…plan properly ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? Make `ResolveRelations` handle plan id properly cherry-pick bugfix apache#45214 to 3.4 ### Why are the changes needed? bug fix for Spark Connect, it won't affect classic Spark SQL before this PR: ``` from pyspark.sql import functions as sf spark.range(10).withColumn("value_1", sf.lit(1)).write.saveAsTable("test_table_1") spark.range(10).withColumnRenamed("id", "index").withColumn("value_2", sf.lit(2)).write.saveAsTable("test_table_2") df1 = spark.read.table("test_table_1") df2 = spark.read.table("test_table_2") df3 = spark.read.table("test_table_1") join1 = df1.join(df2, on=df1.id==df2.index).select(df2.index, df2.value_2) join2 = df3.join(join1, how="left", on=join1.index==df3.id) join2.schema ``` fails with ``` AnalysisException: [CANNOT_RESOLVE_DATAFRAME_COLUMN] Cannot resolve dataframe column "id". It's probably because of illegal references like `df1.select(df2.col("a"))`. SQLSTATE: 42704 ``` That is due to existing plan caching in `ResolveRelations` doesn't work with Spark Connect ``` === Applying Rule org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.analysis.Analyzer$ResolveRelations === '[apache#12]Join LeftOuter, '`==`('index, 'id) '[apache#12]Join LeftOuter, '`==`('index, 'id) !:- '[#9]UnresolvedRelation [test_table_1], [], false :- '[#9]SubqueryAlias spark_catalog.default.test_table_1 !+- '[apache#11]Project ['index, 'value_2] : +- 'UnresolvedCatalogRelation `spark_catalog`.`default`.`test_table_1`, [], false ! +- '[#10]Join Inner, '`==`('id, 'index) +- '[apache#11]Project ['index, 'value_2] ! :- '[#7]UnresolvedRelation [test_table_1], [], false +- '[#10]Join Inner, '`==`('id, 'index) ! +- '[#8]UnresolvedRelation [test_table_2], [], false :- '[#9]SubqueryAlias spark_catalog.default.test_table_1 ! : +- 'UnresolvedCatalogRelation `spark_catalog`.`default`.`test_table_1`, [], false ! +- '[#8]SubqueryAlias spark_catalog.default.test_table_2 ! +- 'UnresolvedCatalogRelation `spark_catalog`.`default`.`test_table_2`, [], false Can not resolve 'id with plan 7 ``` `[#7]UnresolvedRelation [test_table_1], [], false` was wrongly resolved to the cached one ``` :- '[#9]SubqueryAlias spark_catalog.default.test_table_1 +- 'UnresolvedCatalogRelation `spark_catalog`.`default`.`test_table_1`, [], false ``` ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? yes, bug fix ### How was this patch tested? added ut ### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? ci Closes apache#46290 from zhengruifeng/connect_fix_read_join_34. Authored-by: Ruifeng Zheng <ruifengz@apache.org> Signed-off-by: Ruifeng Zheng <ruifengz@apache.org>
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 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.
This is a WIP PR to help me incrementally track and sign-off on changes for a PR to make TungstenAggregate supports aggregate functions that do not support code-gen.