You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
Repository navigation
[Epic] A Collection of Sort Based Optimizations #10313
Many analytic systems store their data with some particular sort order, and the query engine can often take advantage of this sort order to both reduce memory usage and performance
Specific examples in Datafusion include:
Emitting from GroupBy early with partially sorted stream
The same underlying analysis is often required for streaming (where determining what to emit is modeled as a sorted stream, for example on date_trunc(ts) of a stream sorted by timestamp).
Describe the solution you'd like
This epic has a list of optimizations / improvements that further take sortedness into account. Here are some related issues:
Would this ticket be an appropriate place to add tickets related to pushing down sorts to federated query engines? I know that this was discussed previously (i.e. #7871) and it seems that writing a custom optimizer is the current way to handle that.
I will need to do this soon (federated sort pushdown) and it initially wasn't clear to me how to make this work in DataFusion. I can volunteer to write some docs on how to do this once I have an implementation that works.
Would this ticket be an appropriate place to add tickets related to pushing down sorts to federated query engines? I know that this was discussed previously (i.e. #7871) and it seems that writing a custom optimizer is the current way to handle that.
I will need to do this soon (federated sort pushdown) and it initially wasn't clear to me how to make this work in DataFusion. I can volunteer to write some docs on how to do this once I have an implementation that works.
Right now, once TableProvider::execute gets called, the returned ExecutionPlan can report how it is already sorted.
What we don't have is any way to have the optimizer tell a ExecutionPlan that it could reduce the work required in the DataFusion plan if the data was already sorted.
traitExecutionPlan{
...
/// return other possible orders that this ExecutionPlan could return/// (the DataFusion optimizer will use this information to potentially push Sorts /// into the Nodefnpushable_sorts(&self) -> Result<Option<PotentialSortOrders>>> {returnOk(None)}/// return a node like this one except that it its output is sorted according to exprsfnresorted(&self) -> Result<Option<Arc<dynExecutionPlan>>>{returnOk(None)}
And then add a new optimizer pass that tries to push sorts into the plan nodes that report they can provide sorted data 🤔
After digging into and understanding how the datafusion-federation crate works, I don't think we need anything additional for sort pushdown. I basically came to the same realization that @backkem had in #7871 (comment).
My realization essentially comes down to (please correct me if this is incorrect):
DataFusion is a library that provides both query planning (LogicalPlan) and query execution (ExecutionPlan). When we are connecting a set of tables from a remote query engine into DataFusion, what we really want is the ability to get an optimized logical plan and send that plan to be executed by the remote query engine - in its entirety, bypassing the query execution of DataFusion as much as possible. (In reality we still want the query execution DataFusion provides for more complex queries that involve custom UDFs, joins between two different remote query engines, etc).
The TableProvider construct is part of the query execution (ExecutionPlan level) machinery of DataFusion, so trying to teach it to be smarter for the query federation case is an anti-pattern in my mind. But we still need a TableProvider to be registered so we can take advantage of the logical planning (via the auto-transformation of a TableProvider to a TableSource in said planning). The datafusion-federation repo solves this by using a thin wrapper around a TableProvider called a FederatedTableProviderAdaptor whose entire job is to provide a TableSource during logical planning. And through a custom FederationQueryPlanner - it recognizes when there are TableScans of a FederatedTableProviderAdaptor and knows to delegate the query execution for the largest LogicalPlan sub-tree that includes only TableScans from the same source to that source (via the deparsing back to SQL).
Activity
phillipleblanc commentedon May 1, 2024
Would this ticket be an appropriate place to add tickets related to pushing down sorts to federated query engines? I know that this was discussed previously (i.e. #7871) and it seems that writing a custom optimizer is the current way to handle that.
I will need to do this soon (federated sort pushdown) and it initially wasn't clear to me how to make this work in DataFusion. I can volunteer to write some docs on how to do this once I have an implementation that works.
alamb commentedon May 1, 2024
Update here: we merged #9593 and now will work on increasing the test coverage to enable it by default (tracked in #10336)
alamb commentedon May 1, 2024
I added #7871 to the list above -- thank you.
Yes I think this would be a good place to discuss
That would be great, thanks @phillipleblanc
Right now, once
TableProvider::executegets called, the returnedExecutionPlancan report how it is already sorted.What we don't have is any way to have the optimizer tell a
ExecutionPlanthat it could reduce the work required in the DataFusion plan if the data was already sorted.I wonder if we could add something to
ExecutionPlantrait similar toExecutionPlan::repartitionedlikeAnd then add a new optimizer pass that tries to push sorts into the plan nodes that report they can provide sorted data 🤔
phillipleblanc commentedon May 8, 2024
After digging into and understanding how the
datafusion-federationcrate works, I don't think we need anything additional for sort pushdown. I basically came to the same realization that @backkem had in #7871 (comment).My realization essentially comes down to (please correct me if this is incorrect):
DataFusion is a library that provides both query planning (
LogicalPlan) and query execution (ExecutionPlan). When we are connecting a set of tables from a remote query engine into DataFusion, what we really want is the ability to get an optimized logical plan and send that plan to be executed by the remote query engine - in its entirety, bypassing the query execution of DataFusion as much as possible. (In reality we still want the query execution DataFusion provides for more complex queries that involve custom UDFs, joins between two different remote query engines, etc).The
TableProviderconstruct is part of the query execution (ExecutionPlanlevel) machinery of DataFusion, so trying to teach it to be smarter for the query federation case is an anti-pattern in my mind. But we still need aTableProviderto be registered so we can take advantage of the logical planning (via the auto-transformation of aTableProviderto aTableSourcein said planning). Thedatafusion-federationrepo solves this by using a thin wrapper around aTableProvidercalled aFederatedTableProviderAdaptorwhose entire job is to provide aTableSourceduring logical planning. And through a customFederationQueryPlanner- it recognizes when there areTableScans of aFederatedTableProviderAdaptorand knows to delegate the query execution for the largest LogicalPlan sub-tree that includes onlyTableScans from the same source to that source (via the deparsing back to SQL).alamb commentedon May 13, 2024
FYI @NGA-TRAN is working on porting ProgressiveEval to DataFusion: #10488
Dandandan commentedon Dec 4, 2024
I added #13642 and #7053 to the list