-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 29k
[SPARK-28169][SQL] Fix Partition table partition PushDown failed by "OR" expression #24973
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 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
12 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
b47dce7
[SPARK-28169] extract predicate expression deeply
5bc19d4
resolve and deeply
4705fc2
fit scala style
b5e00a5
Fix problem of eslaped Or condition
e8a9b28
Add ExtractPartitionPredicates
55323ce
Fix scala stype
3e8085a
fix scalastyle
e383f64
Fix scala style
c65143d
Change method style
d791135
Add comment
6f81771
add ExtractPartitionPredicates to DataSourceStrategy
01386d3
remove return type since it's short
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
@AngersZhuuuu, just for clarification, this code path does support OR expression but you want to do a partial pushdown right? Considering it needs a lot of codes as @wangyum pointed out, I think we should better try to promote to use (or convert) Spark's Parquet or ORC. It looks like an overkill to me.
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.
@HyukjinKwon What I do is to extract condition's about partition keys.For the old code :
val (pruningPredicates, otherPredicates) = predicates.partition { predicate => !predicate.references.isEmpty && predicate.references.subsetOf(partitionKeyIds) }If in expression, there contains other key, it won't be a push to HiveTableScanExec, So what I to it to fix this situation, just extract all condition about partition keys, then push it to HiveTableScanExec, HiveTableScanExec will handle complex combine expressions.
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.
@HyukjinKwon
Spark's Parquet or ORC is perfect, and it can push down filter condition, but it can't resolve the problem that when we read a Hive table, our first behavior is scan, What this pr want to do is to reduce the time of resolve file info and partition metadata, and the file we scan. Then the file num or partition num is big, it takes too long.
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 think we convert Hive table reading operations into Spark's ones, via, for instance,
spark.sql.hive.convertMetastoreParquetconf. If the diff is small, I might be fine but this does look like an overkill to me. I haven't taken a close look but it virtually looks like we need a fix like #24598I won't object if some other committers are fine with that.
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.
@HyukjinKwon I know that it's better to convert Hive table reading operations into Spark's , but it can't fix all situation. In our production env, we just change hive data's default storage type to orc. For partition table, if different partition's serde is not the same, Convert will failed, since during converting , it will check all partition's file by table level serde.