Skip to content
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

Minor: Add tests for using FilterExec when parquet was pushed down #12362

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Sep 7, 2024

Conversation

alamb
Copy link
Contributor

@alamb alamb commented Sep 6, 2024

Which issue does this PR close?

Part of #4028

Rationale for this change

While reviewing #12135 from @itsjunetime I wanted to make sure everything was hooked up end to end and that the appropriate plan changes were done.

I figured I would write such tests as part of my review, though for some reason the PR doesn't actually improve these plans (I will comment on that separately).

What changes are included in this PR?

This adds "end to end" tests that show what should happen when parquet filter pushdown is enabled (specifically the FilterExec should be gone)

Are these changes tested?

yes, only tests

Are there any user-facing changes?

No, only tests

@github-actions github-actions bot added the sqllogictest SQL Logic Tests (.slt) label Sep 6, 2024
02)--TableScan: alltypes_plain projection=[id], partial_filters=[alltypes_plain.id > Int32(3)]
physical_plan
01)CoalesceBatchesExec: target_batch_size=8192
02)--FilterExec: id@0 > 3
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The goal of #4028 is to remove this FilterExec

Copy link
Contributor

@Jefffrey Jefffrey left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Test case makes sense to me 👍

Comment on lines +49 to +50
statement ok
set datafusion.execution.parquet.pushdown_filters = true;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is it worth setting this to false before creation of t explicitly, or reckon it's unnecessary and fine to rely on defaults?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@alamb alamb Sep 7, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It is a good idea to make it explicit -- I will do so and add a comment about that (update in 2373f37)

@alamb alamb merged commit 5e37bb9 into apache:main Sep 7, 2024
24 checks passed
@alamb
Copy link
Contributor Author

alamb commented Sep 7, 2024

Thanks again @Jefffrey for your review

@alamb alamb deleted the alamb/test_for_pushdown branch September 7, 2024 11:20
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
sqllogictest SQL Logic Tests (.slt)
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants