Skip to content

Fix invalid projection in CommonSubexprEliminate #2915

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
alamb merged 3 commits into from
Jul 15, 2022
Merged

Fix invalid projection in CommonSubexprEliminate #2915

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
49aba06
unit test to reproduce the bug
andygrove Jul 14, 2022
fe2baa2
fix the bug
andygrove Jul 14, 2022
d9f18fa
remove redundant merge of input schema
andygrove Jul 14, 2022
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
33 changes: 29 additions & 4 deletions datafusion/optimizer/src/common_subexpr_eliminate.rs
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -282,15 +282,13 @@ fn build_project_plan(
}

for field in input.schema().fields() {
if !fields_set.contains(field.name()) {
fields_set.insert(field.name().to_owned());
if fields_set.insert(field.qualified_name()) {
Copy link
Member

@waynexia waynexia Jul 15, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nice simplification

Use qualified name instead of unqualified name in the HashSet that tracks which fields have already been added to the projection

This is correct 👍 It used to be inconsistent with L287 which uses qualified name.

fields.push(field.clone());
project_exprs.push(Expr::Column(field.qualified_column()));
}
}

let mut schema = DFSchema::new_with_metadata(fields, HashMap::new())?;
schema.merge(input.schema());
Copy link
Member

@waynexia waynexia Jul 15, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

merge is done in the previous for loop so I think this is redundant. Let's remove it.

let schema = DFSchema::new_with_metadata(fields, HashMap::new())?;

Ok(LogicalPlan::Projection(Projection::try_new_with_schema(
project_exprs,
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -699,6 +697,7 @@ fn replace_common_expr(
mod test {
use super::*;
use crate::test::*;
use datafusion_expr::logical_plan::JoinType;
use datafusion_expr::{
avg, binary_expr, col, lit, logical_plan::builder::LogicalPlanBuilder, sum,
Operator,
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -890,4 +889,30 @@ mod test {
assert!(field_set.insert(field.qualified_name()));
}
}

#[test]
fn redundant_project_fields_join_input() {
let table_scan_1 = test_table_scan_with_name("test1").unwrap();
let table_scan_2 = test_table_scan_with_name("test2").unwrap();
let join = LogicalPlanBuilder::from(table_scan_1)
.join(&table_scan_2, JoinType::Inner, (vec!["a"], vec!["a"]), None)
.unwrap()
.build()
.unwrap();
let affected_id: HashSet<Identifier> =
["c+a".to_string(), "d+a".to_string()].into_iter().collect();
let expr_set = [
("c+a".to_string(), (col("c+a"), 1, DataType::UInt32)),
("d+a".to_string(), (col("d+a"), 1, DataType::UInt32)),
]
.into_iter()
.collect();
let project = build_project_plan(join, affected_id.clone(), &expr_set).unwrap();
let project_2 = build_project_plan(project, affected_id, &expr_set).unwrap();

let mut field_set = HashSet::new();
for field in project_2.schema().fields() {
assert!(field_set.insert(field.qualified_name()));
}
}
}