You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to github@datafusion.apache.org by "michaelsembwever (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org> on 2026/08/25 09:10:10 UTC
[PR] fix(core): reject a DELETE or an UPDATE whose WHERE clause cannot reach the provider [datafusion]
michaelsembwever opened a new pull request, #24657:
URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/24657
## Which issue does this PR close?
https://github.com/apache/datafusion/issues/24656
## Rationale for this change
See ticket.
## What changes are included in this PR?
A `DELETE` or an `UPDATE` whose `WHERE` clause holds an `IN` or an `EXISTS` subquery changed every row of the target table, and reported the whole table as affected. The optimizer rewrites the subquery into a semi join, so the condition leaves the `Filter` nodes that `extract_dml_filters()` reads. The provider then received an empty filter list, which is the encoding for "no WHERE clause", and applied the statement to all rows.
An always-false `WHERE` clause reached the provider the same way. The simplifier folds the predicate into an empty relation, so again no filter survived, and a `DELETE FROM t WHERE false` emptied the table.
Add `classify_dml_input()`, which walks the input plan of a `DELETE` or an `UPDATE` before the provider hook runs:
- an empty relation means that no row matches, so the statement reports a count of 0 and the hook is not called;
- a join, a predicate on another table, or any other node that restricts or multiplies rows raises a "not implemented" error, and the hook is not called.
The hook stays untouched in every rejected case, so a provider that writes to durable storage cannot lose rows.
## Are these changes tested?
Only with the tests provided in this patch, which are based on the assumptions made in the ticket description.
## Are there any user-facing changes?
?
--
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: github-unsubscribe@datafusion.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: github-unsubscribe@datafusion.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: github-help@datafusion.apache.org
Re: [PR] fix(core): reject a DELETE or an UPDATE whose WHERE clause cannot reach the provider [datafusion]
Posted by "michaelsembwever (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
michaelsembwever commented on code in PR #24657:
URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/24657#discussion_r3945262636
##########
datafusion/core/src/physical_planner.rs:
##########
@@ -2203,6 +2220,132 @@ fn get_physical_expr_pair(
Ok((physical_expr, physical_name))
}
+/// How a DELETE or an UPDATE reaches its target table.
+///
+/// The `filters` argument of [`TableProvider::delete_from`] and
+/// [`TableProvider::update`] is the only channel that carries the `WHERE` clause
+/// to the provider, and an empty vector means "no `WHERE` clause, so every row".
+/// A plan whose row restriction cannot travel through that channel must
+/// therefore never reach the provider.
+///
+/// [`TableProvider::delete_from`]: datafusion_catalog::TableProvider::delete_from
+/// [`TableProvider::update`]: datafusion_catalog::TableProvider::update
+enum DmlInput {
+ /// Every row restriction of the statement reaches the provider as a filter.
+ Filters,
+ /// No row matches, so the statement affects no rows and the provider is not
+ /// called at all.
+ NoRows,
+}
+
+/// Check that the input plan of a DELETE or an UPDATE can reach the table
+/// provider without losing part of its `WHERE` clause.
+///
+/// The optimizer rewrites an `IN` or an `EXISTS` subquery into a semi join, and
+/// it folds an always-false predicate into an empty relation. In both cases the
+/// condition leaves the `Filter` nodes that [`extract_dml_filters`] reads, and
+/// the provider would see an empty filter list and change every row.
+///
+/// # Parameters
+/// - `input`: the input plan of the DELETE or the UPDATE
+/// - `target`: the target table of the statement
+/// - `op`: `"DELETE"` or `"UPDATE"`, used in the error message
+///
+/// # Returns
+/// [`DmlInput::Filters`] when the provider may be called, [`DmlInput::NoRows`]
+/// when the statement matches no row, and a "not implemented" error when part of
+/// the `WHERE` clause cannot reach the provider.
+fn classify_dml_input(
+ input: &Arc<LogicalPlan>,
+ target: &TableReference,
+ op: &str,
+) -> Result<DmlInput> {
+ let mut allowed_refs = vec![target.clone()];
+ input.apply(|node| {
+ if let LogicalPlan::SubqueryAlias(alias) = node
+ && let LogicalPlan::TableScan(scan) = alias.input.as_ref()
+ && scan.table_name.resolved_eq(target)
+ {
+ allowed_refs.push(TableReference::bare(alias.alias.to_string()));
+ }
+ Ok(TreeNodeRecursion::Continue)
+ })?;
+
+ let mut result = DmlInput::Filters;
+ input.apply(|node| {
+ match node {
+ // An empty relation means the optimizer proved that no row matches,
+ // so the statement affects no rows.
+ LogicalPlan::EmptyRelation(empty) if !empty.produce_one_row => {
+ result = DmlInput::NoRows;
+ return Ok(TreeNodeRecursion::Stop);
+ }
+ // A join carries the condition in its `on` clause, where
+ // `extract_dml_filters` cannot read it. The optimizer builds one for
+ // an `IN` or an `EXISTS` subquery.
+ LogicalPlan::Join(join) => {
+ return not_impl_err!(
+ "{op} on table '{target}' with an IN or an EXISTS subquery in its \
+ WHERE clause is not supported: the optimizer rewrites the subquery \
+ into a {} join, and the condition does not reach the table provider",
+ join.join_type
+ );
+ }
+ LogicalPlan::Filter(filter) => {
+ // A predicate on another table restricts the rows of the target
+ // table, and the provider cannot evaluate it.
+ for predicate in split_conjunction(&filter.predicate) {
+ if !predicate_is_on_target_multi(predicate, &allowed_refs)? {
+ return not_impl_err!(
+ "{op} on table '{target}' with a WHERE clause that \
+ references another table is not supported"
+ );
+ }
+ }
+ }
+ // Plans that pass every row of the target table through, or that
+ // hold no row restriction of their own.
+ LogicalPlan::TableScan(_)
+ | LogicalPlan::Projection(_)
+ | LogicalPlan::SubqueryAlias(_)
+ | LogicalPlan::Sort(_)
+ | LogicalPlan::Repartition(_)
+ // A `Limit` reaches the provider as no filter at all, so a DELETE
+ // ignores it. That is a separate gap, kept as it is here.
Review Comment:
The code comment at datafusion/core/src/physical_planner.rs:2334 now states that effect precisely instead of calling it "a separate gap".
Note:
- `DELETE FROM t LIMIT 1` on rows (1),(2),(3) reports 3 and empties the table; `DELETE FROM u WHERE column1 > 1 LIMIT 1` reports 2 and deletes both matching rows;
- the gap is `DELETE` only. `UPDATE ... LIMIT` is already rejected at planning (datafusion/sql/src/statement.rs:1168), and `DELETE ... ORDER BY` too, so `DELETE ... LIMIT n` names no row order.
Created issue https://github.com/apache/datafusion/issues/24998
--
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: github-unsubscribe@datafusion.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: github-unsubscribe@datafusion.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: github-help@datafusion.apache.org
Re: [PR] fix(core): reject a DELETE or an UPDATE whose WHERE clause cannot reach the provider [datafusion]
Posted by "martin-g (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
martin-g commented on code in PR #24657:
URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/24657#discussion_r4060511160
##########
datafusion/core/src/physical_planner.rs:
##########
@@ -2246,6 +2226,149 @@ fn get_physical_expr_pair(
Ok((physical_expr, physical_name))
}
+/// How a DELETE or an UPDATE reaches its target table.
+///
+/// The `filters` argument of [`TableProvider::delete_from`] and
+/// [`TableProvider::update`] is the only channel that carries the `WHERE` clause
+/// to the provider, and an empty vector means "no `WHERE` clause, so every row".
+/// A plan whose row restriction cannot travel through that channel must
+/// therefore never reach the provider.
+///
+/// [`TableProvider::delete_from`]: datafusion_catalog::TableProvider::delete_from
+/// [`TableProvider::update`]: datafusion_catalog::TableProvider::update
+enum DmlInput {
+ /// Every row restriction of the statement reaches the provider as a filter.
+ Filters,
+ /// No row matches, so the statement affects no rows and the provider is not
+ /// called at all.
+ NoRows,
+}
+
+/// Collect the table references that a predicate of a DELETE or an UPDATE may
+/// name: the target table itself, and the alias of every scan of the target
+/// table in the input plan.
+///
+/// Both [`classify_dml_input`] and [`extract_dml_filters`] need this set, so the
+/// caller collects it once and passes it to each of them.
+fn collect_dml_target_refs(
+ input: &Arc<LogicalPlan>,
+ target: &TableReference,
+) -> Result<Vec<TableReference>> {
+ let mut allowed_refs = vec![target.clone()];
+ input.apply(|node| {
+ if let LogicalPlan::SubqueryAlias(alias) = node
+ // Check if this alias points to the target table
+ && let LogicalPlan::TableScan(scan) = alias.input.as_ref()
+ && scan.table_name.resolved_eq(target)
+ {
+ allowed_refs.push(TableReference::bare(alias.alias.to_string()));
+ }
+ Ok(TreeNodeRecursion::Continue)
+ })?;
+ Ok(allowed_refs)
+}
+
+/// Check that the input plan of a DELETE or an UPDATE can reach the table
+/// provider without losing part of its `WHERE` clause.
+///
+/// The optimizer rewrites an `IN` or an `EXISTS` subquery into a semi join, and
+/// it folds an always-false predicate into an empty relation. In both cases the
+/// condition leaves the `Filter` nodes that [`extract_dml_filters`] reads, and
+/// the provider would see an empty filter list and change every row.
+///
+/// # Parameters
+/// - `input`: the input plan of the DELETE or the UPDATE
+/// - `target`: the target table of the statement
+/// - `allowed_refs`: the target table and its aliases, from [`collect_dml_target_refs`]
+/// - `op`: `"DELETE"` or `"UPDATE"`, used in the error message
+///
+/// # Returns
+/// * [`DmlInput::Filters`] when the provider may be called
+/// * [`DmlInput::NoRows`] when the statement matches no row
+/// * a "not implemented" error when part of the `WHERE` clause cannot reach the provider.
+fn classify_dml_input(
+ input: &Arc<LogicalPlan>,
+ target: &TableReference,
+ allowed_refs: &[TableReference],
+ op: &str,
+) -> Result<DmlInput> {
+ let mut result = DmlInput::Filters;
+ input.apply(|node| {
+ match node {
+ // An empty relation means the optimizer proved that no row matches,
+ // so the statement affects no rows.
+ LogicalPlan::EmptyRelation(empty) if !empty.produce_one_row => {
+ result = DmlInput::NoRows;
+ return Ok(TreeNodeRecursion::Stop);
+ }
+ // A join carries the condition in its `on` clause, where
+ // `extract_dml_filters` cannot read it. The optimizer builds one for
+ // an `IN` or an `EXISTS` subquery.
+ LogicalPlan::Join(join) => {
+ return not_impl_err!(
+ "{op} on table '{target}' with an IN or an EXISTS subquery in its \
+ WHERE clause is not supported: the optimizer rewrites the subquery \
+ into a {} join, and the condition does not reach the table provider",
+ join.join_type
+ );
+ }
+ LogicalPlan::Filter(filter) => {
+ // A predicate on another table restricts the rows of the target
+ // table, and the provider cannot evaluate it.
+ for predicate in split_conjunction(&filter.predicate) {
+ if !predicate_is_on_target_multi(predicate, allowed_refs)? {
+ return not_impl_err!(
+ "{op} on table '{target}' with a WHERE clause that \
+ references another table is not supported"
+ );
+ }
+ }
+ }
+ // Plans that pass every row of the target table through, or that
+ // hold no row restriction of their own.
+ LogicalPlan::TableScan(_)
Review Comment:
This should probably check that the TableScan's `table_name` is the same as the passed `target`.
```rust
LogicalPlan::TableScan(scan) => {
if !scan.table_name.resolved_eq(target) {
return not_impl_err!(
"{op} on table '{target}' with a scan of another table is not supported"
);
}
```
##########
datafusion/core/src/physical_planner.rs:
##########
@@ -2246,6 +2226,149 @@ fn get_physical_expr_pair(
Ok((physical_expr, physical_name))
}
+/// How a DELETE or an UPDATE reaches its target table.
+///
+/// The `filters` argument of [`TableProvider::delete_from`] and
+/// [`TableProvider::update`] is the only channel that carries the `WHERE` clause
+/// to the provider, and an empty vector means "no `WHERE` clause, so every row".
+/// A plan whose row restriction cannot travel through that channel must
+/// therefore never reach the provider.
+///
+/// [`TableProvider::delete_from`]: datafusion_catalog::TableProvider::delete_from
+/// [`TableProvider::update`]: datafusion_catalog::TableProvider::update
+enum DmlInput {
+ /// Every row restriction of the statement reaches the provider as a filter.
+ Filters,
+ /// No row matches, so the statement affects no rows and the provider is not
+ /// called at all.
+ NoRows,
+}
+
+/// Collect the table references that a predicate of a DELETE or an UPDATE may
+/// name: the target table itself, and the alias of every scan of the target
+/// table in the input plan.
+///
+/// Both [`classify_dml_input`] and [`extract_dml_filters`] need this set, so the
+/// caller collects it once and passes it to each of them.
+fn collect_dml_target_refs(
+ input: &Arc<LogicalPlan>,
+ target: &TableReference,
+) -> Result<Vec<TableReference>> {
+ let mut allowed_refs = vec![target.clone()];
+ input.apply(|node| {
+ if let LogicalPlan::SubqueryAlias(alias) = node
+ // Check if this alias points to the target table
+ && let LogicalPlan::TableScan(scan) = alias.input.as_ref()
+ && scan.table_name.resolved_eq(target)
+ {
+ allowed_refs.push(TableReference::bare(alias.alias.to_string()));
+ }
+ Ok(TreeNodeRecursion::Continue)
+ })?;
+ Ok(allowed_refs)
+}
+
+/// Check that the input plan of a DELETE or an UPDATE can reach the table
+/// provider without losing part of its `WHERE` clause.
+///
+/// The optimizer rewrites an `IN` or an `EXISTS` subquery into a semi join, and
+/// it folds an always-false predicate into an empty relation. In both cases the
+/// condition leaves the `Filter` nodes that [`extract_dml_filters`] reads, and
+/// the provider would see an empty filter list and change every row.
+///
+/// # Parameters
+/// - `input`: the input plan of the DELETE or the UPDATE
+/// - `target`: the target table of the statement
+/// - `allowed_refs`: the target table and its aliases, from [`collect_dml_target_refs`]
+/// - `op`: `"DELETE"` or `"UPDATE"`, used in the error message
+///
+/// # Returns
+/// * [`DmlInput::Filters`] when the provider may be called
+/// * [`DmlInput::NoRows`] when the statement matches no row
+/// * a "not implemented" error when part of the `WHERE` clause cannot reach the provider.
+fn classify_dml_input(
+ input: &Arc<LogicalPlan>,
+ target: &TableReference,
+ allowed_refs: &[TableReference],
+ op: &str,
+) -> Result<DmlInput> {
+ let mut result = DmlInput::Filters;
+ input.apply(|node| {
+ match node {
+ // An empty relation means the optimizer proved that no row matches,
+ // so the statement affects no rows.
+ LogicalPlan::EmptyRelation(empty) if !empty.produce_one_row => {
+ result = DmlInput::NoRows;
+ return Ok(TreeNodeRecursion::Stop);
+ }
+ // A join carries the condition in its `on` clause, where
+ // `extract_dml_filters` cannot read it. The optimizer builds one for
+ // an `IN` or an `EXISTS` subquery.
+ LogicalPlan::Join(join) => {
Review Comment:
This will lead to an error for any JOIN even if there is no `IN or EXISTS` optimized to a `join`. The error message will be wrong in this case.
##########
datafusion/core/src/physical_planner.rs:
##########
@@ -2246,6 +2226,149 @@ fn get_physical_expr_pair(
Ok((physical_expr, physical_name))
}
+/// How a DELETE or an UPDATE reaches its target table.
+///
+/// The `filters` argument of [`TableProvider::delete_from`] and
+/// [`TableProvider::update`] is the only channel that carries the `WHERE` clause
+/// to the provider, and an empty vector means "no `WHERE` clause, so every row".
+/// A plan whose row restriction cannot travel through that channel must
+/// therefore never reach the provider.
+///
+/// [`TableProvider::delete_from`]: datafusion_catalog::TableProvider::delete_from
+/// [`TableProvider::update`]: datafusion_catalog::TableProvider::update
+enum DmlInput {
+ /// Every row restriction of the statement reaches the provider as a filter.
+ Filters,
+ /// No row matches, so the statement affects no rows and the provider is not
+ /// called at all.
+ NoRows,
+}
+
+/// Collect the table references that a predicate of a DELETE or an UPDATE may
+/// name: the target table itself, and the alias of every scan of the target
+/// table in the input plan.
+///
+/// Both [`classify_dml_input`] and [`extract_dml_filters`] need this set, so the
+/// caller collects it once and passes it to each of them.
+fn collect_dml_target_refs(
+ input: &Arc<LogicalPlan>,
+ target: &TableReference,
+) -> Result<Vec<TableReference>> {
+ let mut allowed_refs = vec![target.clone()];
+ input.apply(|node| {
+ if let LogicalPlan::SubqueryAlias(alias) = node
+ // Check if this alias points to the target table
+ && let LogicalPlan::TableScan(scan) = alias.input.as_ref()
+ && scan.table_name.resolved_eq(target)
+ {
+ allowed_refs.push(TableReference::bare(alias.alias.to_string()));
+ }
+ Ok(TreeNodeRecursion::Continue)
+ })?;
+ Ok(allowed_refs)
+}
+
+/// Check that the input plan of a DELETE or an UPDATE can reach the table
+/// provider without losing part of its `WHERE` clause.
+///
+/// The optimizer rewrites an `IN` or an `EXISTS` subquery into a semi join, and
+/// it folds an always-false predicate into an empty relation. In both cases the
+/// condition leaves the `Filter` nodes that [`extract_dml_filters`] reads, and
+/// the provider would see an empty filter list and change every row.
+///
+/// # Parameters
+/// - `input`: the input plan of the DELETE or the UPDATE
+/// - `target`: the target table of the statement
+/// - `allowed_refs`: the target table and its aliases, from [`collect_dml_target_refs`]
+/// - `op`: `"DELETE"` or `"UPDATE"`, used in the error message
+///
+/// # Returns
+/// * [`DmlInput::Filters`] when the provider may be called
+/// * [`DmlInput::NoRows`] when the statement matches no row
+/// * a "not implemented" error when part of the `WHERE` clause cannot reach the provider.
+fn classify_dml_input(
+ input: &Arc<LogicalPlan>,
+ target: &TableReference,
+ allowed_refs: &[TableReference],
+ op: &str,
+) -> Result<DmlInput> {
+ let mut result = DmlInput::Filters;
+ input.apply(|node| {
+ match node {
+ // An empty relation means the optimizer proved that no row matches,
+ // so the statement affects no rows.
+ LogicalPlan::EmptyRelation(empty) if !empty.produce_one_row => {
+ result = DmlInput::NoRows;
+ return Ok(TreeNodeRecursion::Stop);
+ }
+ // A join carries the condition in its `on` clause, where
+ // `extract_dml_filters` cannot read it. The optimizer builds one for
+ // an `IN` or an `EXISTS` subquery.
+ LogicalPlan::Join(join) => {
+ return not_impl_err!(
+ "{op} on table '{target}' with an IN or an EXISTS subquery in its \
+ WHERE clause is not supported: the optimizer rewrites the subquery \
+ into a {} join, and the condition does not reach the table provider",
+ join.join_type
+ );
+ }
+ LogicalPlan::Filter(filter) => {
+ // A predicate on another table restricts the rows of the target
+ // table, and the provider cannot evaluate it.
+ for predicate in split_conjunction(&filter.predicate) {
+ if !predicate_is_on_target_multi(predicate, allowed_refs)? {
+ return not_impl_err!(
+ "{op} on table '{target}' with a WHERE clause that \
+ references another table is not supported"
+ );
+ }
+ }
+ }
+ // Plans that pass every row of the target table through, or that
+ // hold no row restriction of their own.
+ LogicalPlan::TableScan(_)
Review Comment:
Also the TableScan's `filters` should be in the allowed refs.
```rust
for filter in &scan.filters {
if !predicate_is_on_target_multi(filter, allowed_refs)? {
return not_impl_err!(
"{op} on table '{target}' with a scan filter \
that references another table is not supported"
);
}
}
```
--
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: github-unsubscribe@datafusion.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: github-unsubscribe@datafusion.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: github-help@datafusion.apache.org
Re: [PR] fix(core): reject a DELETE or an UPDATE whose WHERE clause cannot reach the provider [datafusion]
Posted by "martin-g (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
martin-g commented on PR #24657:
URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/24657#issuecomment-5777053203
I am going to merge this PR tomorrow unless someone has any objections!
--
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: github-unsubscribe@datafusion.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: github-unsubscribe@datafusion.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: github-help@datafusion.apache.org
Re: [PR] fix(core): reject a DELETE or an UPDATE whose WHERE clause cannot reach the provider [datafusion]
Posted by "michaelsembwever (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
michaelsembwever commented on PR #24657:
URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/24657#issuecomment-5743183463
@martin-g , added a SQUASH commit for additional tests
--
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: github-unsubscribe@datafusion.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: github-unsubscribe@datafusion.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: github-help@datafusion.apache.org
Re: [PR] fix(core): reject a DELETE or an UPDATE whose WHERE clause cannot reach the provider [datafusion]
Posted by "codecov-commenter (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
codecov-commenter commented on PR #24657:
URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/24657#issuecomment-5409342716
## [Codecov](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/datafusion/pull/24657?dropdown=coverage&src=pr&el=h1&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache) Report
:x: Patch coverage is `76.47059%` with `16 lines` in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
:white_check_mark: Project coverage is 81.44%. Comparing base ([`a6e2d3f`](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/datafusion/commit/a6e2d3f7a43b8007817889875b662fa0463468c7?dropdown=coverage&el=desc&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache)) to head ([`5f3e301`](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/datafusion/commit/5f3e301801e3c27f3a3dd69974f71d97e811faad?dropdown=coverage&el=desc&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache)).
:warning: Report is 36 commits behind head on main.
| [Files with missing lines](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/datafusion/pull/24657?dropdown=coverage&src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache) | Patch % | Lines |
|---|---|---|
| [datafusion/core/src/physical\_planner.rs](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/datafusion/pull/24657?src=pr&el=tree&filepath=datafusion%2Fcore%2Fsrc%2Fphysical_planner.rs&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache#diff-ZGF0YWZ1c2lvbi9jb3JlL3NyYy9waHlzaWNhbF9wbGFubmVyLnJz) | 76.47% | [7 Missing and 9 partials :warning: ](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/datafusion/pull/24657?src=pr&el=tree&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache) |
<details><summary>Additional details and impacted files</summary>
```diff
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #24657 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 81.36% 81.44% +0.07%
==========================================
Files 1117 1118 +1
Lines 397872 399611 +1739
Branches 397872 399611 +1739
==========================================
+ Hits 323725 325451 +1726
+ Misses 55229 55153 -76
- Partials 18918 19007 +89
```
</details>
[:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Harness](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/datafusion/pull/24657?dropdown=coverage&src=pr&el=continue&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache).
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? [Share it here](https://about.codecov.io/codecov-pr-comment-feedback/?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache).
<details><summary> :rocket: New features to boost your workflow: </summary>
- :snowflake: [Test Analytics](https://docs.codecov.com/docs/test-analytics): Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
- :package: [JS Bundle Analysis](https://docs.codecov.com/docs/javascript-bundle-analysis): Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.
</details>
--
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: github-unsubscribe@datafusion.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: github-unsubscribe@datafusion.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: github-help@datafusion.apache.org
Re: [PR] fix(core): reject a DELETE or an UPDATE whose WHERE clause cannot reach the provider [datafusion]
Posted by "michaelsembwever (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
michaelsembwever commented on code in PR #24657:
URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/24657#discussion_r3944933570
##########
datafusion/core/src/physical_planner.rs:
##########
@@ -2203,6 +2220,132 @@ fn get_physical_expr_pair(
Ok((physical_expr, physical_name))
}
+/// How a DELETE or an UPDATE reaches its target table.
+///
+/// The `filters` argument of [`TableProvider::delete_from`] and
+/// [`TableProvider::update`] is the only channel that carries the `WHERE` clause
+/// to the provider, and an empty vector means "no `WHERE` clause, so every row".
+/// A plan whose row restriction cannot travel through that channel must
+/// therefore never reach the provider.
+///
+/// [`TableProvider::delete_from`]: datafusion_catalog::TableProvider::delete_from
+/// [`TableProvider::update`]: datafusion_catalog::TableProvider::update
+enum DmlInput {
+ /// Every row restriction of the statement reaches the provider as a filter.
+ Filters,
+ /// No row matches, so the statement affects no rows and the provider is not
+ /// called at all.
+ NoRows,
+}
+
+/// Check that the input plan of a DELETE or an UPDATE can reach the table
+/// provider without losing part of its `WHERE` clause.
+///
+/// The optimizer rewrites an `IN` or an `EXISTS` subquery into a semi join, and
+/// it folds an always-false predicate into an empty relation. In both cases the
+/// condition leaves the `Filter` nodes that [`extract_dml_filters`] reads, and
+/// the provider would see an empty filter list and change every row.
+///
+/// # Parameters
+/// - `input`: the input plan of the DELETE or the UPDATE
+/// - `target`: the target table of the statement
+/// - `op`: `"DELETE"` or `"UPDATE"`, used in the error message
+///
+/// # Returns
+/// [`DmlInput::Filters`] when the provider may be called, [`DmlInput::NoRows`]
+/// when the statement matches no row, and a "not implemented" error when part of
+/// the `WHERE` clause cannot reach the provider.
+fn classify_dml_input(
+ input: &Arc<LogicalPlan>,
+ target: &TableReference,
+ op: &str,
+) -> Result<DmlInput> {
+ let mut allowed_refs = vec![target.clone()];
+ input.apply(|node| {
+ if let LogicalPlan::SubqueryAlias(alias) = node
+ && let LogicalPlan::TableScan(scan) = alias.input.as_ref()
+ && scan.table_name.resolved_eq(target)
+ {
+ allowed_refs.push(TableReference::bare(alias.alias.to_string()));
+ }
+ Ok(TreeNodeRecursion::Continue)
+ })?;
Review Comment:
extracted `collect_dml_target_refs()`. Both `classify_dml_input()` and e`xtract_dml_filters()` had the same alias-collecting loop; each DML arm now calls the helper once and passes `&[TableReference]` into both.
##########
datafusion/core/src/physical_planner.rs:
##########
@@ -793,17 +793,26 @@ impl DefaultPhysicalPlanner {
target,
op: WriteOp::Delete,
input,
- ..
+ output_schema,
}) => {
if let Some(provider) = target.downcast_ref::<DefaultTableSource>() {
- let filters = extract_dml_filters(input, table_name)?;
- provider
- .table_provider
- .delete_from(session_state, filters)
- .await
- .map_err(|e| {
- e.context(format!("DELETE operation on table '{table_name}'"))
- })?
+ match classify_dml_input(input, table_name, "DELETE")? {
+ DmlInput::NoRows => {
+ zero_rows_affected_exec(Arc::clone(output_schema.inner()))?
+ }
+ DmlInput::Filters => {
+ let filters = extract_dml_filters(input, table_name)?;
Review Comment:
extracted `collect_dml_target_refs()`. Both `classify_dml_input()` and e`xtract_dml_filters()` had the same alias-collecting loop; each DML arm now calls the helper once and passes `&[TableReference]` into both.
--
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: github-unsubscribe@datafusion.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: github-unsubscribe@datafusion.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: github-help@datafusion.apache.org
Re: [PR] fix(core): reject a DELETE or an UPDATE whose WHERE clause cannot reach the provider [datafusion]
Posted by "martin-g (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
martin-g commented on code in PR #24657:
URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/24657#discussion_r3869869662
##########
datafusion/sqllogictest/test_files/dml_delete.slt:
##########
@@ -200,3 +200,62 @@ SELECT * FROM test_delete_in;
statement ok
DROP TABLE test_delete_in;
+
+# Test DELETE with an IN or an EXISTS subquery in the WHERE clause
+# The optimizer rewrites the subquery into a semi join, so the condition cannot
+# reach the table provider as a filter. DataFusion rejects the statement instead
+# of deleting every row.
+statement ok
+CREATE TABLE test_delete_subquery AS VALUES (1), (2), (3);
+
+statement ok
+CREATE TABLE test_delete_subquery_src AS VALUES (2);
+
+statement error DataFusion error: This feature is not implemented: DELETE on table 'test_delete_subquery' with an IN or an EXISTS subquery in its WHERE clause is not supported
+DELETE FROM test_delete_subquery WHERE column1 IN (SELECT column1 FROM test_delete_subquery_src);
Review Comment:
It would be good to execute the tests also with `set datafusion.optimizer.max_passes = 0;`.
Some other tests exercise this.
##########
datafusion/core/src/physical_planner.rs:
##########
@@ -2203,6 +2220,132 @@ fn get_physical_expr_pair(
Ok((physical_expr, physical_name))
}
+/// How a DELETE or an UPDATE reaches its target table.
+///
+/// The `filters` argument of [`TableProvider::delete_from`] and
+/// [`TableProvider::update`] is the only channel that carries the `WHERE` clause
+/// to the provider, and an empty vector means "no `WHERE` clause, so every row".
+/// A plan whose row restriction cannot travel through that channel must
+/// therefore never reach the provider.
+///
+/// [`TableProvider::delete_from`]: datafusion_catalog::TableProvider::delete_from
+/// [`TableProvider::update`]: datafusion_catalog::TableProvider::update
+enum DmlInput {
+ /// Every row restriction of the statement reaches the provider as a filter.
+ Filters,
+ /// No row matches, so the statement affects no rows and the provider is not
+ /// called at all.
+ NoRows,
+}
+
+/// Check that the input plan of a DELETE or an UPDATE can reach the table
+/// provider without losing part of its `WHERE` clause.
+///
+/// The optimizer rewrites an `IN` or an `EXISTS` subquery into a semi join, and
+/// it folds an always-false predicate into an empty relation. In both cases the
+/// condition leaves the `Filter` nodes that [`extract_dml_filters`] reads, and
+/// the provider would see an empty filter list and change every row.
+///
+/// # Parameters
+/// - `input`: the input plan of the DELETE or the UPDATE
+/// - `target`: the target table of the statement
+/// - `op`: `"DELETE"` or `"UPDATE"`, used in the error message
+///
+/// # Returns
+/// [`DmlInput::Filters`] when the provider may be called, [`DmlInput::NoRows`]
+/// when the statement matches no row, and a "not implemented" error when part of
+/// the `WHERE` clause cannot reach the provider.
+fn classify_dml_input(
+ input: &Arc<LogicalPlan>,
+ target: &TableReference,
+ op: &str,
+) -> Result<DmlInput> {
+ let mut allowed_refs = vec![target.clone()];
+ input.apply(|node| {
+ if let LogicalPlan::SubqueryAlias(alias) = node
+ && let LogicalPlan::TableScan(scan) = alias.input.as_ref()
+ && scan.table_name.resolved_eq(target)
+ {
+ allowed_refs.push(TableReference::bare(alias.alias.to_string()));
+ }
+ Ok(TreeNodeRecursion::Continue)
+ })?;
Review Comment:
This duplicates the same logic at https://github.com/thelastpickle/datafusion/blob/5f3e301801e3c27f3a3dd69974f71d97e811faad/datafusion/core/src/physical_planner.rs#L2376C5-L2388
It would be good to extract it to a helper function and reuse it.
##########
datafusion/core/src/physical_planner.rs:
##########
@@ -2203,6 +2220,132 @@ fn get_physical_expr_pair(
Ok((physical_expr, physical_name))
}
+/// How a DELETE or an UPDATE reaches its target table.
+///
+/// The `filters` argument of [`TableProvider::delete_from`] and
+/// [`TableProvider::update`] is the only channel that carries the `WHERE` clause
+/// to the provider, and an empty vector means "no `WHERE` clause, so every row".
+/// A plan whose row restriction cannot travel through that channel must
+/// therefore never reach the provider.
+///
+/// [`TableProvider::delete_from`]: datafusion_catalog::TableProvider::delete_from
+/// [`TableProvider::update`]: datafusion_catalog::TableProvider::update
+enum DmlInput {
+ /// Every row restriction of the statement reaches the provider as a filter.
+ Filters,
+ /// No row matches, so the statement affects no rows and the provider is not
+ /// called at all.
+ NoRows,
+}
+
+/// Check that the input plan of a DELETE or an UPDATE can reach the table
+/// provider without losing part of its `WHERE` clause.
+///
+/// The optimizer rewrites an `IN` or an `EXISTS` subquery into a semi join, and
+/// it folds an always-false predicate into an empty relation. In both cases the
+/// condition leaves the `Filter` nodes that [`extract_dml_filters`] reads, and
+/// the provider would see an empty filter list and change every row.
+///
+/// # Parameters
+/// - `input`: the input plan of the DELETE or the UPDATE
+/// - `target`: the target table of the statement
+/// - `op`: `"DELETE"` or `"UPDATE"`, used in the error message
+///
+/// # Returns
+/// [`DmlInput::Filters`] when the provider may be called, [`DmlInput::NoRows`]
+/// when the statement matches no row, and a "not implemented" error when part of
+/// the `WHERE` clause cannot reach the provider.
Review Comment:
as bullets
```suggestion
/// * [`DmlInput::Filters`] when the provider may be called
/// * [`DmlInput::NoRows`] when the statement matches no row
/// * a "not implemented" error when part of the `WHERE` clause cannot reach the provider.
```
##########
datafusion/core/src/physical_planner.rs:
##########
@@ -793,17 +793,26 @@ impl DefaultPhysicalPlanner {
target,
op: WriteOp::Delete,
input,
- ..
+ output_schema,
}) => {
if let Some(provider) = target.downcast_ref::<DefaultTableSource>() {
- let filters = extract_dml_filters(input, table_name)?;
- provider
- .table_provider
- .delete_from(session_state, filters)
- .await
- .map_err(|e| {
- e.context(format!("DELETE operation on table '{table_name}'"))
- })?
+ match classify_dml_input(input, table_name, "DELETE")? {
+ DmlInput::NoRows => {
+ zero_rows_affected_exec(Arc::clone(output_schema.inner()))?
+ }
+ DmlInput::Filters => {
+ let filters = extract_dml_filters(input, table_name)?;
Review Comment:
nit: both `classify_dml_input()` and `extract_dml_filters()` traverse the tree to collect the `allowed_refs`. Is it worthy to collect them before calling these methods ?! It looks negligible.
##########
datafusion/core/src/physical_planner.rs:
##########
@@ -2203,6 +2220,132 @@ fn get_physical_expr_pair(
Ok((physical_expr, physical_name))
}
+/// How a DELETE or an UPDATE reaches its target table.
+///
+/// The `filters` argument of [`TableProvider::delete_from`] and
+/// [`TableProvider::update`] is the only channel that carries the `WHERE` clause
+/// to the provider, and an empty vector means "no `WHERE` clause, so every row".
+/// A plan whose row restriction cannot travel through that channel must
+/// therefore never reach the provider.
+///
+/// [`TableProvider::delete_from`]: datafusion_catalog::TableProvider::delete_from
+/// [`TableProvider::update`]: datafusion_catalog::TableProvider::update
+enum DmlInput {
+ /// Every row restriction of the statement reaches the provider as a filter.
+ Filters,
+ /// No row matches, so the statement affects no rows and the provider is not
+ /// called at all.
+ NoRows,
+}
+
+/// Check that the input plan of a DELETE or an UPDATE can reach the table
+/// provider without losing part of its `WHERE` clause.
+///
+/// The optimizer rewrites an `IN` or an `EXISTS` subquery into a semi join, and
+/// it folds an always-false predicate into an empty relation. In both cases the
+/// condition leaves the `Filter` nodes that [`extract_dml_filters`] reads, and
+/// the provider would see an empty filter list and change every row.
+///
+/// # Parameters
+/// - `input`: the input plan of the DELETE or the UPDATE
+/// - `target`: the target table of the statement
+/// - `op`: `"DELETE"` or `"UPDATE"`, used in the error message
+///
+/// # Returns
+/// [`DmlInput::Filters`] when the provider may be called, [`DmlInput::NoRows`]
+/// when the statement matches no row, and a "not implemented" error when part of
+/// the `WHERE` clause cannot reach the provider.
+fn classify_dml_input(
+ input: &Arc<LogicalPlan>,
+ target: &TableReference,
+ op: &str,
+) -> Result<DmlInput> {
+ let mut allowed_refs = vec![target.clone()];
+ input.apply(|node| {
+ if let LogicalPlan::SubqueryAlias(alias) = node
+ && let LogicalPlan::TableScan(scan) = alias.input.as_ref()
+ && scan.table_name.resolved_eq(target)
+ {
+ allowed_refs.push(TableReference::bare(alias.alias.to_string()));
+ }
+ Ok(TreeNodeRecursion::Continue)
+ })?;
+
+ let mut result = DmlInput::Filters;
+ input.apply(|node| {
+ match node {
+ // An empty relation means the optimizer proved that no row matches,
+ // so the statement affects no rows.
+ LogicalPlan::EmptyRelation(empty) if !empty.produce_one_row => {
+ result = DmlInput::NoRows;
+ return Ok(TreeNodeRecursion::Stop);
+ }
+ // A join carries the condition in its `on` clause, where
+ // `extract_dml_filters` cannot read it. The optimizer builds one for
+ // an `IN` or an `EXISTS` subquery.
+ LogicalPlan::Join(join) => {
+ return not_impl_err!(
+ "{op} on table '{target}' with an IN or an EXISTS subquery in its \
+ WHERE clause is not supported: the optimizer rewrites the subquery \
+ into a {} join, and the condition does not reach the table provider",
+ join.join_type
+ );
+ }
+ LogicalPlan::Filter(filter) => {
+ // A predicate on another table restricts the rows of the target
+ // table, and the provider cannot evaluate it.
+ for predicate in split_conjunction(&filter.predicate) {
+ if !predicate_is_on_target_multi(predicate, &allowed_refs)? {
+ return not_impl_err!(
+ "{op} on table '{target}' with a WHERE clause that \
+ references another table is not supported"
+ );
+ }
+ }
+ }
+ // Plans that pass every row of the target table through, or that
+ // hold no row restriction of their own.
+ LogicalPlan::TableScan(_)
+ | LogicalPlan::Projection(_)
+ | LogicalPlan::SubqueryAlias(_)
+ | LogicalPlan::Sort(_)
+ | LogicalPlan::Repartition(_)
+ // A `Limit` reaches the provider as no filter at all, so a DELETE
+ // ignores it. That is a separate gap, kept as it is here.
Review Comment:
let's file an issue for this. I didn't find an existing one
--
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: github-unsubscribe@datafusion.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: github-unsubscribe@datafusion.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: github-help@datafusion.apache.org
Re: [PR] fix(core): reject a DELETE or an UPDATE whose WHERE clause cannot reach the provider [datafusion]
Posted by "michaelsembwever (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
michaelsembwever commented on code in PR #24657:
URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/24657#discussion_r3945252347
##########
datafusion/sqllogictest/test_files/dml_delete.slt:
##########
@@ -200,3 +200,62 @@ SELECT * FROM test_delete_in;
statement ok
DROP TABLE test_delete_in;
+
+# Test DELETE with an IN or an EXISTS subquery in the WHERE clause
+# The optimizer rewrites the subquery into a semi join, so the condition cannot
+# reach the table provider as a filter. DataFusion rejects the statement instead
+# of deleting every row.
+statement ok
+CREATE TABLE test_delete_subquery AS VALUES (1), (2), (3);
+
+statement ok
+CREATE TABLE test_delete_subquery_src AS VALUES (2);
+
+statement error DataFusion error: This feature is not implemented: DELETE on table 'test_delete_subquery' with an IN or an EXISTS subquery in its WHERE clause is not supported
+DELETE FROM test_delete_subquery WHERE column1 IN (SELECT column1 FROM test_delete_subquery_src);
Review Comment:
added a section to dml_delete.slt and dml_update.slt repeating every statement with the optimizer off.
verifiying:
- the subquery predicate reaches the provider and is rejected when the provider compiles it ( feature is not implemented: physical plan does not support logical expression InSubquery (and Exists)),
- WHERE false and WHERE 1 = 2 reach the provider as predicates and match no row ( count = 0 )
--
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: github-unsubscribe@datafusion.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: github-unsubscribe@datafusion.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: github-help@datafusion.apache.org
Re: [PR] fix(core): reject a DELETE or an UPDATE whose WHERE clause cannot reach the provider [datafusion]
Posted by "martin-g (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
martin-g merged PR #24657:
URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/24657
--
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: github-unsubscribe@datafusion.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: github-unsubscribe@datafusion.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: github-help@datafusion.apache.org
Re: [PR] fix(core): reject a DELETE or an UPDATE whose WHERE clause cannot reach the provider [datafusion]
Posted by "martin-g (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>.
martin-g commented on code in PR #24657:
URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/24657#discussion_r4071909907
##########
datafusion/core/src/physical_planner.rs:
##########
@@ -2246,6 +2226,149 @@ fn get_physical_expr_pair(
Ok((physical_expr, physical_name))
}
+/// How a DELETE or an UPDATE reaches its target table.
+///
+/// The `filters` argument of [`TableProvider::delete_from`] and
+/// [`TableProvider::update`] is the only channel that carries the `WHERE` clause
+/// to the provider, and an empty vector means "no `WHERE` clause, so every row".
+/// A plan whose row restriction cannot travel through that channel must
+/// therefore never reach the provider.
+///
+/// [`TableProvider::delete_from`]: datafusion_catalog::TableProvider::delete_from
+/// [`TableProvider::update`]: datafusion_catalog::TableProvider::update
+enum DmlInput {
+ /// Every row restriction of the statement reaches the provider as a filter.
+ Filters,
+ /// No row matches, so the statement affects no rows and the provider is not
+ /// called at all.
+ NoRows,
+}
+
+/// Collect the table references that a predicate of a DELETE or an UPDATE may
+/// name: the target table itself, and the alias of every scan of the target
+/// table in the input plan.
+///
+/// Both [`classify_dml_input`] and [`extract_dml_filters`] need this set, so the
+/// caller collects it once and passes it to each of them.
+fn collect_dml_target_refs(
+ input: &Arc<LogicalPlan>,
+ target: &TableReference,
+) -> Result<Vec<TableReference>> {
+ let mut allowed_refs = vec![target.clone()];
+ input.apply(|node| {
+ if let LogicalPlan::SubqueryAlias(alias) = node
+ // Check if this alias points to the target table
+ && let LogicalPlan::TableScan(scan) = alias.input.as_ref()
+ && scan.table_name.resolved_eq(target)
+ {
+ allowed_refs.push(TableReference::bare(alias.alias.to_string()));
+ }
+ Ok(TreeNodeRecursion::Continue)
+ })?;
+ Ok(allowed_refs)
+}
+
+/// Check that the input plan of a DELETE or an UPDATE can reach the table
+/// provider without losing part of its `WHERE` clause.
+///
+/// The optimizer rewrites an `IN` or an `EXISTS` subquery into a semi join, and
+/// it folds an always-false predicate into an empty relation. In both cases the
+/// condition leaves the `Filter` nodes that [`extract_dml_filters`] reads, and
+/// the provider would see an empty filter list and change every row.
+///
+/// # Parameters
+/// - `input`: the input plan of the DELETE or the UPDATE
+/// - `target`: the target table of the statement
+/// - `allowed_refs`: the target table and its aliases, from [`collect_dml_target_refs`]
+/// - `op`: `"DELETE"` or `"UPDATE"`, used in the error message
+///
+/// # Returns
+/// * [`DmlInput::Filters`] when the provider may be called
+/// * [`DmlInput::NoRows`] when the statement matches no row
+/// * a "not implemented" error when part of the `WHERE` clause cannot reach the provider.
+fn classify_dml_input(
+ input: &Arc<LogicalPlan>,
+ target: &TableReference,
+ allowed_refs: &[TableReference],
+ op: &str,
+) -> Result<DmlInput> {
+ let mut result = DmlInput::Filters;
+ input.apply(|node| {
+ match node {
+ // An empty relation means the optimizer proved that no row matches,
+ // so the statement affects no rows.
+ LogicalPlan::EmptyRelation(empty) if !empty.produce_one_row => {
+ result = DmlInput::NoRows;
+ return Ok(TreeNodeRecursion::Stop);
+ }
+ // A join carries the condition in its `on` clause, where
+ // `extract_dml_filters` cannot read it. The optimizer builds one for
+ // an `IN` or an `EXISTS` subquery.
+ LogicalPlan::Join(join) => {
+ return not_impl_err!(
+ "{op} on table '{target}' with an IN or an EXISTS subquery in its \
+ WHERE clause is not supported: the optimizer rewrites the subquery \
+ into a {} join, and the condition does not reach the table provider",
+ join.join_type
+ );
+ }
+ LogicalPlan::Filter(filter) => {
+ // A predicate on another table restricts the rows of the target
+ // table, and the provider cannot evaluate it.
+ for predicate in split_conjunction(&filter.predicate) {
+ if !predicate_is_on_target_multi(predicate, allowed_refs)? {
+ return not_impl_err!(
+ "{op} on table '{target}' with a WHERE clause that \
+ references another table is not supported"
+ );
+ }
+ }
+ }
+ // Plans that pass every row of the target table through, or that
+ // hold no row restriction of their own.
+ LogicalPlan::TableScan(_)
Review Comment:
datafusion_sql::planner::SqlToRel::get_delete_target does not allow joins, so this is not really needed.
--
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: github-unsubscribe@datafusion.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: github-unsubscribe@datafusion.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: github-help@datafusion.apache.org