Repository navigation
fix: retain only valid orderings after order-preserving repartition - #26747
Conversation
|
@jayzhan211 This should be ready for review. It needed a little more than following #26654, as keeping only the merge key ordering also removed valid cast-derived orderings, causing an existing unbounded-stream query to fail planning. This PR also preserves projected cast relationships so those valid orderings can be inferred again. |
jayzhan211
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@Kristofferjoha thanks for picking up #26745 and for tracking down the cast-derived orderings the unbounded test needed! The repartition change looks right. Two problems with the new CastExpr rule in EquivalenceGroup::project block merging. Volatile sources get recorded as equalities, which makes ORDER BY ... LIMIT return the wrong rows. And limiting the rule to casts makes strictly order-preserving functions like to_unixtime fail planning on unbounded input.
| for (target, _) in targets.iter() { | ||
| cls.push(Arc::clone(target)); | ||
| } | ||
| if source.is::<CastExpr>() { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This records x = CAST(r) even when the source is volatile, and then the planner picks the wrong rows. With random() the two calls are independent draws:
SET datafusion.execution.target_partitions = 1;
CREATE TABLE g AS SELECT value AS v FROM generate_series(1, 2000);
SELECT r, x FROM (
SELECT random() AS r, CAST(random() AS FLOAT) AS x FROM g ORDER BY r LIMIT 1000
) ORDER BY x;On main the plan is Sort[x] over TopK[r]. On this branch it becomes a single TopK(fetch=1000), expr=[x], so it returns the 1000 smallest x instead of the 1000 smallest r (max r in the output is 1.00 instead of about 0.50). Skipping volatile sources fixes it locally:
- if source.is::<CastExpr>() {
+ if source.is::<CastExpr>() && !is_volatile(source) {with use datafusion_physical_expr_common::physical_expr::is_volatile;.
| for (target, _) in targets.iter() { | ||
| cls.push(Arc::clone(target)); | ||
| } | ||
| if source.is::<CastExpr>() { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Limiting this to CastExpr brings back the original planning failure for other strictly order-preserving functions. If I swap the cast in the unbounded test for to_unixtime(a) or from_unixtime(CAST(a AS BIGINT)), main plans it with a sorted window, but this branch fails with SanityCheckPlan ... Cannot execute pipeline breaking queries:
EXPLAIN SELECT a, x, SUM(c) OVER (PARTITION BY x ORDER BY b) s
FROM (SELECT to_unixtime(a) x, a, b, c FROM t_inf);The equality holds for any deterministic expression, so recording it for every non-volatile source fixes these. The full sqllogictest suite passes with no expected-plan changes:
- if source.is::<CastExpr>() {
+ if !source.children().is_empty() && !is_volatile(source) {Could you add one of these queries next to the existing unbounded test?
| // Equivalence Properties | ||
| let mut eq_properties = input.equivalence_properties().clone(); | ||
| // If the ordering is lost, reset the ordering equivalence class: | ||
| let input_partitions = input.output_partitioning().partition_count(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Optional: both branches only matter when there is more than one input partition, so this could be one block, and it would keep a comment like the one in SortPreservingMergeExec:
// Fusing several input partitions keeps only the merge key ordering,
// and per-partition constants no longer hold.
if input.output_partitioning().partition_count() > 1 {
eq_properties.clear_orderings();
if preserve_order && let Some(ordering) = input.output_ordering() {
eq_properties.add_ordering(ordering.clone());
}
eq_properties.clear_per_partition_constants();
}| @@ -1402,6 +1412,28 @@ impl EquivalenceProperties { | |||
| /// Returns an [`ExprProperties`] object containing the ordering and range | |||
| /// information for the given expression. | |||
| pub fn get_expr_properties(&self, expr: Arc<dyn PhysicalExpr>) -> ExprProperties { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Optional: could the doc comment mention that this now falls back to the sort properties of an equivalent expression? A short comment on the new block in class.rs saying why the equality is recorded would also help: it keeps orderings derived through strict functions after a merge resets the orderings.
|
@jayzhan211 Thank you for the review as always. Addressed the comments. While testing, I found another wrong-result case exposed by the broader equality rule. This should return r = 16777216, but with the broader equality rule it returns r = 16777217. Both integers cast to the same float value, and sort pushdown replaces the inner TopK[r] with TopK[x], changing which row survives the limit. I added a small fix to retain the inner TopK’s selection keys when they already satisfy the outer ordering, plus an exact-result regression test. |
jayzhan211
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@Kristofferjoha thanks for the updates, and nice catch on the lossy TopK case! Everything from the last round is fixed. One problem remains, and it comes from the broader rule I suggested last time. Details inline.
| } | ||
| // Retain deterministic expressions as equalities so orderings derived | ||
| // through strict functions can be inferred after a merge clears orderings. | ||
| if !source.children().is_empty() && !is_volatile(source) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The broader rule I suggested last round has a problem, sorry about that: the new equality survives an outer join's NULL padding. This is #26036, which so far needed a filter like WHERE b = coalesce(a, 0). With this PR a plain projection is enough. On a padded row x is NULL but CASE WHEN a IS NULL THEN 0 ELSE a END is 0, so on this branch the outer sort below is dropped and the query returns 1, 2, 0. Main returns 0, 1, 2:
SET datafusion.execution.target_partitions = 1;
CREATE TABLE padded_l(k INT) AS VALUES (1), (2), (3);
CREATE TABLE padded_r(k INT, a INT) AS VALUES (1, 1), (2, 2);
SELECT y FROM (
SELECT CASE WHEN a IS NULL THEN 0 ELSE a END AS y FROM (
SELECT rr.x, rr.a
FROM (SELECT k, a, CASE WHEN a IS NULL THEN 0 ELSE a END AS x FROM padded_r) rr
RIGHT JOIN padded_l ON padded_l.k = rr.k
ORDER BY rr.x LIMIT 100
)
) ORDER BY y;Keeping only the column members on the padded side in EquivalenceGroup::join fixes both this query and the #26036 repro. With it and the query above added to equivalence_properties.slt (expected 0, 1, 2), the full sqllogictest suite passes with no expected-plan changes. Could you include it here and add Closes #26036?
-use crate::expressions::Literal;
+use crate::expressions::{Column, Literal};
@@ impl EquivalenceClass {
+ /// Keeps what still holds on a join side whose unmatched rows are padded
+ /// with NULLs: padded columns stay equal to each other, but constants and
+ /// computed members do not (`coalesce(a, 0)` is 0 where `a` is NULL).
+ fn null_pad(&mut self) {
+ self.constant = None;
+ self.exprs.retain(|expr| expr.is::<Column>());
+ }
@@ pub fn join(
if matches!(join_type, JoinType::Right | JoinType::Full) {
- cls.constant = None;
+ cls.null_pad();
}
@@
) {
- cls.constant = None;
+ cls.null_pad();
}There was a problem hiding this comment.
Outer sort should be retained now, added Closes #26306 to description.
|
Thanks @Kristofferjoha ! |
…rdering (apache#27191) ## Which issue does this PR close? - Closes apache#26762. ## Rationale for this change Queries that planned in earlier releases fail with `SanityCheckPlan` when a window's input ordering starts with a per-partition constant or is proven through an equality such as `a = CAST(c AS DATE)`. Across 7,440 generated query runs, `main` has 62 failures on queries that plan on 55.2.0, and this PR has none, with the same rows wherever both plan. There are three causes. In each one, window planning and `SanityCheckPlan` reach different answers about whether the input is sorted: | Introduced by | Example | Why they disagree | |---|---|---| | apache#23528 (in 55.0.0) | The apache#26762 query | Normalized orderings keep per-partition constants, but `add_constants` drops them, so window planning sees `[total]` and `SanityCheckPlan` sees `[k, total]` | | apache#25922 (on `branch-56`) | A window on `c` over a TopK on `(k, a, c)`, with `k` a per-partition constant and `a = CAST(c AS DATE)` | `add_constants` discovers that `[a, c]` implies `[c]`, but an ordering added after the equality doesn't | | apache#26747 (on `branch-56`) | A window on `(k, c)` over a TopK on `(k, a, c)`, where `a` isn't selected | The sort is removed below a projection because its input has the ordering, and the projection can't prove it | This PR replaces apache#27140 and keeps its commit. ## What changes are included in this PR? Start reading at `add_orderings`. It is the decision I most want reviewed, because it makes the optimizer claim more orderings, and a wrong claim means wrong results. | Where | Change | Fixes | |---|---|---| | `SortKeyWalk::new` | An ordering's head skips leading fixed expressions before the first key is pinned | apache#23528 | | `add_orderings` | Discover the orderings a new ordering implies through known equalities, as `add_constants` and `add_equal_conditions` already do, for any key and past the constants an ordering keeps: `[k, a, c]` with `a = CAST(c AS DATE)` implies `[k, c]` | apache#25922, apache#26747 | | `handle_projection_pushdown` | If the input has the ordering but the projection can't prove it, keep the sort above the projection | The failures the first row would otherwise add, when a projection drops a leading per-partition constant | | `RepartitionExec` | Clear per-partition constants before adding the merge ordering, as `SortPreservingMergeExec` does | Otherwise the second row keeps `[c]` from `[k, a, c]` after a merge, where it holds only within each partition | | `SortKeyWalk::is_fixed` | Return early for a column that isn't pinned or constant | The first row made single-key checks about 30% slower | **Who is affected.** Plans with an ordering that starts with a per-partition constant, or that is proven through an equality or a column a projection drops. It can't stop halfway. **No API change.** Discovery in `add_orderings` can fail only on an expression that doesn't match the schema. That implied ordering is then left out, which can cost a sort but not change results. **Worst case.** 4 of the 7,440 generated runs plan a sort that `main` doesn't: a `GROUP BY k, c` over a TopK on `(a, c)` with `a = CAST(c AS DATE)`, at 4 partitions. Knowing `[c]`, the aggregate streams on `c` and sorts on `c` after its hash repartition. `main` picks the same aggregate when the ordering is known before the equality. 392 runs have fewer sorts. ## What is the testing strategy for this PR? - `window.slt` covers each cause, including a merge of partitions above the sort, and checks the plans. Removing any one of the first three changes, limiting discovery to the first key, or not skipping constants makes tests fail, in `window.slt` or in the unit tests for the walk and for implied orderings. A `RepartitionExec` unit test covers the merge. - All SLT files pass with no existing plan changing, as do the `physical_optimizer` integration tests and the equivalence fuzz tests. - A sweep of functions that look order-preserving but aren't found no wrong ordering. Details below. <details> <summary>Generated query runs, benchmarks, rejected alternatives, and queries that still fail</summary> **Generated runs.** Each sweep runs at `target_partitions` 1 and 4. A regression plans on the reference build and fails on the other build. | Sweep | Runs | `main`, vs 55.2.0 | `main`, vs before apache#23528 | This PR, vs both | |---|---|---|---|---| | Per-partition constants: 6 inputs, 3 orderings, 5 projections, up to 12 consumers | 2,016 | 0 | 4 | 0 | | Orderings proven through `a = CAST(c AS DATE)` | 3,120 | 56 | 56 | 0 | | An operator between the ordering and the consumer: joins of each type on either side, filter, aggregate, union | 1,584 | 6 | 36 | 0 | | `head = f(arg)` for `CAST(x AS VARCHAR)`, `ABS`, negation, modulo, `upper` and order-preserving functions, in all 4 sort directions | 720 | 0 | 0 | 0, and no wrong ordering | The results are the same with this patch on `branch-56`, where all SLT files pass as well. Compared with `main` on the runs that plan on both, the rows are the same, 4 runs have more sorts (see the worst case above) and 392 have fewer. **Benchmarks.** `equivalence_properties`, best of 10 alternating runs on a busy laptop, so approximate: single-key checks are 6-12% slower (about 20-40 ns), and window-heavy orderings are 24-33% faster. | Benchmark | `main` | This PR | |---|---|---| | `ordering_satisfy/1_key/8` | 359 ns | 380 ns | | `ordering_satisfy_requirement/1_key/8` | 307 ns | 329 ns | | `find_longest_permutation/1_expr/32` | 306 ns | 344 ns | | `window/4` | 1,543 ns | 1,181 ns | | `window/32` | 7,319 ns | 4,889 ns | **Rejected.** - Having `add_constants` keep per-partition constants fails `test_eliminate_redundant_monotonic_sorts`. - Labelling `lower(g)` as a uniform constant isn't enough, because a constant from an aggregate without `GROUP BY` really is per-partition. - Having the projection leave a per-partition constant it drops out of its orderings, instead of the check in `handle_projection_pushdown`, makes 2 generated queries fail `SanityCheckPlan`: a window over a `GROUP BY` whose input ordering leads with such a constant. - Applying the projection check to every node in `pushdown_sorts_helper` only fixes one more query, and that query already fails on every release, so I kept the narrower check. **Still failing, not regressions.** A window over a `UNION ALL` of two TopKs that have `v AS w` fails on every build I tried, including before apache#23528: ```sql SELECT *, ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY w) AS r FROM ( SELECT k, v, w FROM (SELECT k, v, v AS w FROM (SELECT lower(g) AS k, v FROM t5 WHERE g = 'a') ORDER BY k, v LIMIT 30) UNION ALL SELECT k, v, w FROM (SELECT k, v, v AS w FROM (SELECT lower(g) AS k, v FROM t5 WHERE g = 'a') ORDER BY k, v LIMIT 30) ) ORDER BY r; ``` </details> ## Are there any user-facing changes? Affected queries plan again. This is a candidate for `branch-56`, where it applies without conflicts. --------- Co-authored-by: Andrew Lamb <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5.1 <[email protected]>
Which issue does this PR close?
Closes #26745.
Closes #26036.
Rationale for this change
An order-preserving repartition can incorrectly retain independent input orderings that do not hold after merging partitions. This lets the planner remove a necessary sort, causing
ORDER BYto return rows in the wrong order.What changes are included in this PR?
What is the testing strategy for this PR?
order.slt, verifying exact row order.equivalence_properties.sltandmonotonic_projection_test.slt.Are there any user-facing changes?
Only that queries affected by #26745 now return rows in the requested order.