Skip to content

Only unnest source for EmptyRelation #15159

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
goldmedal merged 5 commits into from
Mar 24, 2025
Merged

Only unnest source for EmptyRelation #15159

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
fb1f679
Only unnest source for `EmptyRelation`
blaginin Mar 11, 2025
28f5301
Add a note on new condition
blaginin Mar 15, 2025
1cb70d7
Merge branch 'main' into bugfix/unnest-source
blaginin Mar 15, 2025
ef4a79d
Remove new test
blaginin Mar 17, 2025
d9218c5
Put all unnest assumptions into one function
blaginin Mar 20, 2025
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
Next Next commit
Only unnest source for EmptyRelation
  • Loading branch information
@blaginin
blaginin committed Mar 11, 2025
commit fb1f67983d82c59bf583cc2cc810fce034b05905
13 changes: 11 additions & 2 deletions datafusion/sql/src/unparser/plan.rs
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -377,8 +377,17 @@ impl Unparser<'_> {
};
if self.dialect.unnest_as_table_factor() && unnest_input_type.is_some() {
if let LogicalPlan::Unnest(unnest) = &p.input.as_ref() {
return self
.unnest_to_table_factor_sql(unnest, query, select, relation);
if let LogicalPlan::Projection(projection) = unnest.input.as_ref()
Copy link
Contributor

@alamb alamb Mar 17, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This feels like something that is a limitation of unnest_to_table_factor_sql -- would it make sense to put the check in there so the check and the code with the assumption are in the same place?

{
if matches!(
projection.input.as_ref(),
LogicalPlan::EmptyRelation(_)
Copy link
Contributor

@goldmedal goldmedal Mar 12, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It's better to add some comments to explain why we match EmptyRelation.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@blaginin blaginin Mar 15, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you, added in 28f5301

) {
return self.unnest_to_table_factor_sql(
unnest, query, select, relation,
);
}
}
}
}

Expand Down
18 changes: 18 additions & 0 deletions datafusion/sql/tests/cases/plan_to_sql.rs
View file
Open in desktop
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@blaginin blaginin Mar 17, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Had to remove this new test because now (even in main) it produces SELECT * FROM (SELECT [1, 2, 3] AS c) CROSS JOIN UNNEST(c). Feels like this should be discussed separately

Copy link
Contributor

@alamb alamb Mar 17, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't understand this comment -- doesn't this PR add a new test?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@blaginin blaginin Mar 21, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sorry -- before I added one more test, but then I have to remove it due to ef4a79d - I think we can discuss in that issue and work on it further

Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -639,6 +639,24 @@ fn roundtrip_statement_with_dialect() -> Result<()> {
parser_dialect: Box::new(GenericDialect {}),
unparser_dialect: Box::new(CustomDialectBuilder::default().with_unnest_as_table_factor(true).build()),
},
TestStatementWithDialect {
sql: "SELECT unnest([1, 2, 3, 4]) from unnest([1, 2, 3]);",
expected: r#"SELECT UNNEST([1, 2, 3, 4]) AS UNNEST(make_array(Int64(1),Int64(2),Int64(3),Int64(4))) FROM UNNEST([1, 2, 3])"#,
parser_dialect: Box::new(GenericDialect {}),
unparser_dialect: Box::new(CustomDialectBuilder::default().with_unnest_as_table_factor(true).build()),
},
TestStatementWithDialect {
sql: "SELECT unnest([1, 2, 3, 4]) from unnest([1, 2, 3]);",
expected: r#"SELECT UNNEST([1, 2, 3, 4]) AS UNNEST(make_array(Int64(1),Int64(2),Int64(3),Int64(4))) FROM UNNEST([1, 2, 3])"#,
parser_dialect: Box::new(GenericDialect {}),
unparser_dialect: Box::new(CustomDialectBuilder::default().with_unnest_as_table_factor(true).build()),
},
Comment on lines +636 to +647
Copy link
Contributor

@goldmedal goldmedal Mar 22, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

They look like the same. 🤔 I think we can remove one of them.

TestStatementWithDialect {
sql: "select * from (select [1, 2, 3] as c), unnest(c);",
expected: r#"SELECT * FROM (SELECT [1, 2, 3] AS c) CROSS JOIN UNNEST(c)"#,
parser_dialect: Box::new(GenericDialect {}),
unparser_dialect: Box::new(CustomDialectBuilder::default().with_unnest_as_table_factor(true).build()),
},
TestStatementWithDialect {
sql: "SELECT * FROM unnest_table u, UNNEST(u.array_col)",
expected: r#"SELECT * FROM unnest_table AS u CROSS JOIN LATERAL (SELECT UNNEST(u.array_col) AS "UNNEST(outer_ref(u.array_col))")"#,
Expand Down
Loading