You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to reviews@spark.apache.org by GitBox <gi...@apache.org> on 2021/07/06 15:05:25 UTC
[GitHub] [spark] SaurabhChawla100 opened a new pull request #33232: [SPARK-36027][SQL] Add the code change to pushdown filter in case of typedFilter
SaurabhChawla100 opened a new pull request #33232:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/33232
<!--
Thanks for sending a pull request! Here are some tips for you:
1. If this is your first time, please read our contributor guidelines: https://spark.apache.org/contributing.html
2. Ensure you have added or run the appropriate tests for your PR: https://spark.apache.org/developer-tools.html
3. If the PR is unfinished, add '[WIP]' in your PR title, e.g., '[WIP][SPARK-XXXX] Your PR title ...'.
4. Be sure to keep the PR description updated to reflect all changes.
5. Please write your PR title to summarize what this PR proposes.
6. If possible, provide a concise example to reproduce the issue for a faster review.
7. If you want to add a new configuration, please read the guideline first for naming configurations in
'core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/internal/config/ConfigEntry.scala'.
8. If you want to add or modify an error message, please read the guideline first:
https://spark.apache.org/error-message-guidelines.html
-->
### What changes were proposed in this pull request?
<!--
Please clarify what changes you are proposing. The purpose of this section is to outline the changes and how this PR fixes the issue.
If possible, please consider writing useful notes for better and faster reviews in your PR. See the examples below.
1. If you refactor some codes with changing classes, showing the class hierarchy will help reviewers.
2. If you fix some SQL features, you can provide some references of other DBMSes.
3. If there is design documentation, please add the link.
4. If there is a discussion in the mailing list, please add the link.
-->
### Why are the changes needed?
<!--
Please clarify why the changes are needed. For instance,
1. If you propose a new API, clarify the use case for a new API.
2. If you fix a bug, you can clarify why it is a bug.
-->
### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
<!--
Note that it means *any* user-facing change including all aspects such as the documentation fix.
If yes, please clarify the previous behavior and the change this PR proposes - provide the console output, description and/or an example to show the behavior difference if possible.
If possible, please also clarify if this is a user-facing change compared to the released Spark versions or within the unreleased branches such as master.
If no, write 'No'.
-->
### How was this patch tested?
<!--
If tests were added, say they were added here. Please make sure to add some test cases that check the changes thoroughly including negative and positive cases if possible.
If it was tested in a way different from regular unit tests, please clarify how you tested step by step, ideally copy and paste-able, so that other reviewers can test and check, and descendants can verify in the future.
If tests were not added, please describe why they were not added and/or why it was difficult to add.
-->
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-help@spark.apache.org
[GitHub] [spark] viirya commented on a change in pull request #33232: [SPARK-36027][SQL] Add the code change to pushdown filter in case of typedFilter
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
viirya commented on a change in pull request #33232:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/33232#discussion_r665130791
##########
File path: sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/optimizer/Optimizer.scala
##########
@@ -1442,6 +1442,12 @@ object PushPredicateThroughNonJoin extends Rule[LogicalPlan] with PredicateHelpe
pushDownPredicate(filter, u.child) { predicate =>
u.withNewChildren(Seq(Filter(predicate, u.child)))
}
+
+ // Push down filter predicates in case filter having child as TypedFilter.
+ // In this scenario inorder to push the filter predicates there is need to
+ // to push Filter beneath the TypedFilter.
+ case Filter(condition, typeFilter @ TypedFilter(_, _, _, _, _)) =>
+ typeFilter.copy(child = Filter(condition, typeFilter.child))
Review comment:
BTW, looks like typed filter is separated from normal filter. So it should be easier to adjust filter, typed filter operator in queries to make filter pushdown-able even it is not optimized?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-help@spark.apache.org
[GitHub] [spark] SaurabhChawla100 commented on a change in pull request #33232: [SPARK-36027][SQL] Add the code change to pushdown filter in case of typedFilter
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
SaurabhChawla100 commented on a change in pull request #33232:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/33232#discussion_r665089953
##########
File path: sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/optimizer/Optimizer.scala
##########
@@ -1442,6 +1442,12 @@ object PushPredicateThroughNonJoin extends Rule[LogicalPlan] with PredicateHelpe
pushDownPredicate(filter, u.child) { predicate =>
u.withNewChildren(Seq(Filter(predicate, u.child)))
}
+
+ // Push down filter predicates in case filter having child as TypedFilter.
+ // In this scenario inorder to push the filter predicates there is need to
+ // to push Filter beneath the TypedFilter.
+ case Filter(condition, typeFilter @ TypedFilter(_, _, _, _, _)) =>
+ typeFilter.copy(child = Filter(condition, typeFilter.child))
Review comment:
@HyukjinKwon - Thank you for reviewing this PR.
Yes that makes sense for some function that are selecting the first n records on each task and applying the filter on top of that.If the filter sequence change the output will be different.
In my scenario which is having typeFilter on checking the value that exist in the bloomFilter. I have to add this rule as the part of "SparkSession.experimental.extraOptimizations = Seq()" then.
Any other suggestion on this.How to take on these kind of scenario.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-help@spark.apache.org
[GitHub] [spark] HyukjinKwon commented on a change in pull request #33232: [SPARK-36027][SQL] Add the code change to pushdown filter in case of typedFilter
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
HyukjinKwon commented on a change in pull request #33232:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/33232#discussion_r665029120
##########
File path: sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/optimizer/Optimizer.scala
##########
@@ -1442,6 +1442,12 @@ object PushPredicateThroughNonJoin extends Rule[LogicalPlan] with PredicateHelpe
pushDownPredicate(filter, u.child) { predicate =>
u.withNewChildren(Seq(Filter(predicate, u.child)))
}
+
+ // Push down filter predicates in case filter having child as TypedFilter.
+ // In this scenario inorder to push the filter predicates there is need to
+ // to push Filter beneath the TypedFilter.
+ case Filter(condition, typeFilter @ TypedFilter(_, _, _, _, _)) =>
+ typeFilter.copy(child = Filter(condition, typeFilter.child))
Review comment:
The only thing makes me worried is `TypedFilter` takes an arbitrary function that can depend on, e.g, number of records being filtered or any sort of global variable for the task. Once the order is switched, the logic can be broken. e.g.)
```scala
object RecordFilteredPerTask {
var count = 0
}
df.filter({ v =>
RecordFilteredPerTask.count += 1
RecordFilteredPerTask.count > 5
})
```
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-help@spark.apache.org
[GitHub] [spark] viirya commented on a change in pull request #33232: [SPARK-36027][SQL] Add the code change to pushdown filter in case of typedFilter
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
viirya commented on a change in pull request #33232:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/33232#discussion_r665128102
##########
File path: sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/optimizer/Optimizer.scala
##########
@@ -1442,6 +1442,12 @@ object PushPredicateThroughNonJoin extends Rule[LogicalPlan] with PredicateHelpe
pushDownPredicate(filter, u.child) { predicate =>
u.withNewChildren(Seq(Filter(predicate, u.child)))
}
+
+ // Push down filter predicates in case filter having child as TypedFilter.
+ // In this scenario inorder to push the filter predicates there is need to
+ // to push Filter beneath the TypedFilter.
+ case Filter(condition, typeFilter @ TypedFilter(_, _, _, _, _)) =>
+ typeFilter.copy(child = Filter(condition, typeFilter.child))
Review comment:
Hmm, it looks like we don't well document if typed filter function can be non-deterministic or not. If we look at UDF, it is deterministic by default, though you can ask it to be non-deterministic.
So that's said, I suppose the typed filter function is deterministic, though we don't provide a way to make it as non-deterministic.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-help@spark.apache.org
[GitHub] [spark] HyukjinKwon commented on a change in pull request #33232: [SPARK-36027][SQL] Add the code change to pushdown filter in case of typedFilter
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
HyukjinKwon commented on a change in pull request #33232:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/33232#discussion_r665029120
##########
File path: sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/optimizer/Optimizer.scala
##########
@@ -1442,6 +1442,12 @@ object PushPredicateThroughNonJoin extends Rule[LogicalPlan] with PredicateHelpe
pushDownPredicate(filter, u.child) { predicate =>
u.withNewChildren(Seq(Filter(predicate, u.child)))
}
+
+ // Push down filter predicates in case filter having child as TypedFilter.
+ // In this scenario inorder to push the filter predicates there is need to
+ // to push Filter beneath the TypedFilter.
+ case Filter(condition, typeFilter @ TypedFilter(_, _, _, _, _)) =>
+ typeFilter.copy(child = Filter(condition, typeFilter.child))
Review comment:
The only thing that worries me is `TypedFilter` takes an arbitrary function that can depend on, e.g, number of records being filtered or any sort of global variable for the task. Once the order is switched, the logic can be broken. e.g.)
```scala
object RecordFilteredPerTask {
var count = 0
}
df.filter({ v =>
RecordFilteredPerTask.count += 1
RecordFilteredPerTask.count > 5
})
```
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-help@spark.apache.org
[GitHub] [spark] HyukjinKwon commented on a change in pull request #33232: [SPARK-36027][SQL] Add the code change to pushdown filter in case of typedFilter
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
HyukjinKwon commented on a change in pull request #33232:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/33232#discussion_r665029120
##########
File path: sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/optimizer/Optimizer.scala
##########
@@ -1442,6 +1442,12 @@ object PushPredicateThroughNonJoin extends Rule[LogicalPlan] with PredicateHelpe
pushDownPredicate(filter, u.child) { predicate =>
u.withNewChildren(Seq(Filter(predicate, u.child)))
}
+
+ // Push down filter predicates in case filter having child as TypedFilter.
+ // In this scenario inorder to push the filter predicates there is need to
+ // to push Filter beneath the TypedFilter.
+ case Filter(condition, typeFilter @ TypedFilter(_, _, _, _, _)) =>
+ typeFilter.copy(child = Filter(condition, typeFilter.child))
Review comment:
The only thing makes me worried is `TypedFilter` takes an arbitrary function that can depend on, e.g, number of records being filtered or any sort of global variable for the task. Once the order is switched, the logic can be broken. e.g.)
```scala
object RecordFilteredPerTask {
var count = 0
}
df.filter({ v =>
RecordFilteredPerTask.count += 1
RecordFilteredPerTask.count > 5
})
```
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-help@spark.apache.org
[GitHub] [spark] github-actions[bot] closed pull request #33232: [SPARK-36027][SQL] Add the code change to pushdown filter in case of typedFilter
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
github-actions[bot] closed pull request #33232:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/33232
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-help@spark.apache.org
[GitHub] [spark] viirya commented on a change in pull request #33232: [SPARK-36027][SQL] Add the code change to pushdown filter in case of typedFilter
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
viirya commented on a change in pull request #33232:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/33232#discussion_r665128760
##########
File path: sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/optimizer/Optimizer.scala
##########
@@ -1442,6 +1442,12 @@ object PushPredicateThroughNonJoin extends Rule[LogicalPlan] with PredicateHelpe
pushDownPredicate(filter, u.child) { predicate =>
u.withNewChildren(Seq(Filter(predicate, u.child)))
}
+
+ // Push down filter predicates in case filter having child as TypedFilter.
+ // In this scenario inorder to push the filter predicates there is need to
+ // to push Filter beneath the TypedFilter.
+ case Filter(condition, typeFilter @ TypedFilter(_, _, _, _, _)) =>
+ typeFilter.copy(child = Filter(condition, typeFilter.child))
Review comment:
To be safer here, we may exclude the possibility that users use non-deterministic typed filter function, actually.
##########
File path: sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/optimizer/Optimizer.scala
##########
@@ -1442,6 +1442,12 @@ object PushPredicateThroughNonJoin extends Rule[LogicalPlan] with PredicateHelpe
pushDownPredicate(filter, u.child) { predicate =>
u.withNewChildren(Seq(Filter(predicate, u.child)))
}
+
+ // Push down filter predicates in case filter having child as TypedFilter.
+ // In this scenario inorder to push the filter predicates there is need to
+ // to push Filter beneath the TypedFilter.
+ case Filter(condition, typeFilter @ TypedFilter(_, _, _, _, _)) =>
+ typeFilter.copy(child = Filter(condition, typeFilter.child))
Review comment:
To be safer here, we may not exclude the possibility that users use non-deterministic typed filter function, actually.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-help@spark.apache.org
[GitHub] [spark] AmplabJenkins commented on pull request #33232: [SPARK-36027][SQL] Add the code change to pushdown filter in case of typedFilter
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
AmplabJenkins commented on pull request #33232:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/33232#issuecomment-874842990
Can one of the admins verify this patch?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-help@spark.apache.org
[GitHub] [spark] SaurabhChawla100 commented on a change in pull request #33232: [SPARK-36027][SQL] Add the code change to pushdown filter in case of typedFilter
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
SaurabhChawla100 commented on a change in pull request #33232:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/33232#discussion_r665089953
##########
File path: sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/optimizer/Optimizer.scala
##########
@@ -1442,6 +1442,12 @@ object PushPredicateThroughNonJoin extends Rule[LogicalPlan] with PredicateHelpe
pushDownPredicate(filter, u.child) { predicate =>
u.withNewChildren(Seq(Filter(predicate, u.child)))
}
+
+ // Push down filter predicates in case filter having child as TypedFilter.
+ // In this scenario inorder to push the filter predicates there is need to
+ // to push Filter beneath the TypedFilter.
+ case Filter(condition, typeFilter @ TypedFilter(_, _, _, _, _)) =>
+ typeFilter.copy(child = Filter(condition, typeFilter.child))
Review comment:
@HyukjinKwon - Thank you for reviewing this PR.
Yes that makes sense for some function that are selecting the first n records on each task and applying the filter on top of that.If the filter sequence change the output will be different.
In my scenario which is having typeFilter on checking the value that exist in the bloomFilter. I have to add as this rule as the part of "SparkSession.experimental.extraOptimizations = Seq()" then.
Any other suggestion on this.How to take on these kind of scenario.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-help@spark.apache.org
[GitHub] [spark] github-actions[bot] commented on pull request #33232: [SPARK-36027][SQL] Add the code change to pushdown filter in case of typedFilter
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
github-actions[bot] commented on pull request #33232:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/33232#issuecomment-945024726
We're closing this PR because it hasn't been updated in a while. This isn't a judgement on the merit of the PR in any way. It's just a way of keeping the PR queue manageable.
If you'd like to revive this PR, please reopen it and ask a committer to remove the Stale tag!
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-help@spark.apache.org
[GitHub] [spark] SaurabhChawla100 commented on pull request #33232: [SPARK-36027][SQL] Add the code change to pushdown filter in case of typedFilter
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
SaurabhChawla100 commented on pull request #33232:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/33232#issuecomment-875259211
cc @cloud-fan @HyukjinKwon @viirya
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-help@spark.apache.org
[GitHub] [spark] SaurabhChawla100 commented on a change in pull request #33232: [SPARK-36027][SQL] Add the code change to pushdown filter in case of typedFilter
Posted by GitBox <gi...@apache.org>.
SaurabhChawla100 commented on a change in pull request #33232:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/33232#discussion_r665152620
##########
File path: sql/catalyst/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/catalyst/optimizer/Optimizer.scala
##########
@@ -1442,6 +1442,12 @@ object PushPredicateThroughNonJoin extends Rule[LogicalPlan] with PredicateHelpe
pushDownPredicate(filter, u.child) { predicate =>
u.withNewChildren(Seq(Filter(predicate, u.child)))
}
+
+ // Push down filter predicates in case filter having child as TypedFilter.
+ // In this scenario inorder to push the filter predicates there is need to
+ // to push Filter beneath the TypedFilter.
+ case Filter(condition, typeFilter @ TypedFilter(_, _, _, _, _)) =>
+ typeFilter.copy(child = Filter(condition, typeFilter.child))
Review comment:
**BTW, looks like typed filter is separated from normal filter. So it should be easier to adjust filter, typed filter operator in queries to make filter pushdown-able even it is not optimized?**
This is what you mean to say here
Like this in the query itself df.filter("id=1").filter(SomeTypeFilter) instead of df.filter(SomeTypeFilter).filter("id=1").
For this we need to tell user that used typeFilter after the normal filter, since normal filter might partitioned filter and improve the the performance of the query. I thought if we can do something in the optimizer rule to handle such scenarios
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscribe@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-help@spark.apache.org