-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.3k
fix: preserve scan order during sort-preserving merge limit pushdown #24273
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.
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
Open
Theodus
wants to merge
4
commits into
apache:main
Choose a base branch
from
edgeandnode:theodus/limit-pushdown-preserve-spm-order
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+152
−19
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
85f5870
fix: preserve scan order during sort-preserving merge limit pushdown
Theodus 0dab6cf
test: cover ordered limit pruning with sort-preserving merge
Theodus e972cd3
fix: preserve scan order across nested limit pushdown
Theodus 7da9015
fix: scope order preservation during limit pushdown
Theodus File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Could we clear
preserve_orderwhen ordered fetch scope ends instead of carrying it into later limits? For example, withSortPreservingMergeExec(fetch=5) -> SortExec -> LocalLimitExec(fetch=10) -> DataSourceExec,SortExecclears outer fetch, but this|=keeps flag set and applies it to independent inner limit. That disables Parquet limit pruning and file-stream work stealing even though inner limit is not order-sensitive. Is this a concern, or am I missing where state is reset?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for catching this. You’re right,
preserve_ordercould leak past theSortExecinto the independent inner limit. Fixed in 7da9015 by clearing it after the outer fetch is applied. I also added a test for this case.