[multistage] run PhysicalPlanVisitor on leaf for residual nodes #11843
Conversation
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
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #11843 +/- ##
============================================
+ Coverage 61.40% 61.45% +0.04%
+ Complexity 1145 207 -938
============================================
Files 2378 2380 +2
Lines 128851 128926 +75
Branches 19926 19942 +16
============================================
+ Hits 79127 79232 +105
+ Misses 44002 43949 -53
- Partials 5722 5745 +23
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
... and 12 files with indirect coverage changes 📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more |
walterddr
changed the title
Jackie-Jiang
added
enhancement
multi-stage
walterddr
force-pushed
the
poc_rel_distribution_leaf_planning
branch
2 times, most recently
from
79a7a69 to
36546bb
Compare
connected with QueryRunner refactor and simplify leaf stage compilation fix linter and further refactoring simplified visitor and context class, add javadoc fix server plan request gen issues
walterddr
force-pushed
the
poc_rel_distribution_leaf_planning
branch
from
36546bb to
ca4380b
Compare
walterddr
force-pushed
the
poc_rel_distribution_leaf_planning
branch
from
5ccf4e2 to
c7003bb
Compare
walterddr
commented
Nov 1, 2023
Comment on lines
+265
to
+269
| // put a constant false expression | ||
| Expression constantFalseExpr = RequestUtils.getFunctionExpression(FilterKind.CONSTANT.name()); | ||
| constantFalseExpr.getFunctionCall().setOperands(Arrays.asList(leftExpr, | ||
| RequestUtils.getLiteralExpression(false))); | ||
| expressions.add(constantFalseExpr); |
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this is not actually the right way to go b/c this basically requires the query to be written in the format of
SELECT ... WHERE CONSTANT(someCol, false)
instead of the right way:
SELECT ... WHERE CONSTANT(false)
or
SELECT ... WHERE false
however, it will be a bit more complex to make a constant supported Predicate b/c it assumes the LHS to be an identifier in most of the pinot-server code.
walterddr
changed the title
This was referenced Nov 1, 2023
Contributor
Author
|
closing in favor of #11937 |
walterddr
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 13, 2023
) currently pinotQuery only supports limited amount of PlanNodes this means an Exchange must be inserted in order to ensure the leaf stage can be converted into a PinotQuery. However this is a misuse of Exchange This PR plans to split the ServerRequest planning into 2 stages - first plan as much as possible into PinotQuery - for any remainder nodes that cannot be planned into PinotQuery, will be run together with the LeafStageTransferrableBlockOperator as the input locally. This PR also follows up with the refactoring from #11439. - removed server plan request context entirely and replace it with fields used by server side. - extends OpChainExecutionContext with additional info from ServerOpChainExecutionContext - break down steps from ServerPlanRequestUtils.build method into 3 parts --> - compile pinot query - convert pinot query into instance requests (based on physical segments) - construct an OpChain that sits on top Context: alternative PR to #11843 --------- Co-authored-by: Rong Rong <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
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.
currently pinotQuery only supports limited amount of PlanNodes
this means an Exchange must be inserted in order to ensure the leaf stage can be converted into a PinotQuery. However this is a misuse of Exchange
This PR plans to split the ServerRequest planning into 2 stages
This PR also follows up with the refactoring from #11439.
Follow up
It is not easy to test the server physical plan gen, so this PR only utilize existing test cases, and more comprehensive tests are done in #11831