[SPARK-28345][SQL][Python] PythonUDF predicate should be able to pushdown to join #25106
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
|
Test build #107503 has finished for PR 25106 at commit
|
Member
|
retest this please |
|
Test build #107525 has finished for PR 25106 at commit
|
Member
Author
Member
|
Looks fine to me from a cursory look. If it's not merged, I will take a closer look within a couple of days. |
Member
|
Merged to master. |
vinodkc
pushed a commit
to vinodkc/spark
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 18, 2019
…down to join
## What changes were proposed in this pull request?
A `Filter` predicate using `PythonUDF` can't be push down into join condition, currently. A predicate like that should be able to push down to join condition. For `PythonUDF`s that can't be evaluated in join condition, `PullOutPythonUDFInJoinCondition` will pull them out later.
An example like:
```scala
val pythonTestUDF = TestPythonUDF(name = "udf")
val left = Seq((1, 2), (2, 3)).toDF("a", "b")
val right = Seq((1, 2), (3, 4)).toDF("c", "d")
val df = left.crossJoin(right).where(pythonTestUDF($"a") === pythonTestUDF($"c"))
```
Query plan before the PR:
```
== Physical Plan ==
*(3) Project [a#2121, b#2122, c#2132, d#2133]
+- *(3) Filter (pythonUDF0#2142 = pythonUDF1#2143)
+- BatchEvalPython [udf(a#2121), udf(c#2132)], [pythonUDF0#2142, pythonUDF1#2143]
+- BroadcastNestedLoopJoin BuildRight, Cross
:- *(1) Project [_1#2116 AS a#2121, _2#2117 AS b#2122]
: +- LocalTableScan [_1#2116, _2#2117]
+- BroadcastExchange IdentityBroadcastMode
+- *(2) Project [_1#2127 AS c#2132, _2#2128 AS d#2133]
+- LocalTableScan [_1#2127, _2#2128]
```
Query plan after the PR:
```
== Physical Plan ==
*(3) Project [a#2121, b#2122, c#2132, d#2133]
+- *(3) BroadcastHashJoin [pythonUDF0#2142], [pythonUDF0#2143], Cross, BuildRight
:- BatchEvalPython [udf(a#2121)], [pythonUDF0#2142]
: +- *(1) Project [_1#2116 AS a#2121, _2#2117 AS b#2122]
: +- LocalTableScan [_1#2116, _2#2117]
+- BroadcastExchange HashedRelationBroadcastMode(List(input[2, string, true]))
+- BatchEvalPython [udf(c#2132)], [pythonUDF0#2143]
+- *(2) Project [_1#2127 AS c#2132, _2#2128 AS d#2133]
+- LocalTableScan [_1#2127, _2#2128]
```
After this PR, the join can use `BroadcastHashJoin`, instead of `BroadcastNestedLoopJoin`.
## How was this patch tested?
Added tests.
Closes apache#25106 from viirya/pythonudf-join-condition.
Authored-by: Liang-Chi Hsieh <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: HyukjinKwon <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 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.
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
A
Filterpredicate usingPythonUDFcan't be push down into join condition, currently. A predicate like that should be able to push down to join condition. ForPythonUDFs that can't be evaluated in join condition,PullOutPythonUDFInJoinConditionwill pull them out later.An example like:
Query plan before the PR:
Query plan after the PR:
After this PR, the join can use
BroadcastHashJoin, instead ofBroadcastNestedLoopJoin.How was this patch tested?
Added tests.