Skip to content
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

Jump to bottom

[17.0] Fix and Make aggregation planner handle aggregation functions better and handle Distinct in operator #13277

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jun 12, 2023
Merged

[17.0] Fix and Make aggregation planner handle aggregation functions better and handle Distinct in operator #13277

merged 2 commits into from
Jun 12, 2023

Conversation

harshit-gangal
Copy link
Member

@harshit-gangal harshit-gangal commented Jun 8, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Description

This PR is a backport of #13201 and #13228
as both are related and fixes planner bugs.

Related Issue(s)

Checklist

  • Tests were added or are not required
  • Did the new or modified tests pass consistently locally and on the CI

systay and others added 2 commits June 9, 2023 01:29
@systay @GuptaManan100 @harshit-gangal
Handle DISTINCT with the new operators (vitessio#13201)
4a71f3d 
* handle distinct with the new operators

Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <[email protected]>

* feat: do not fail limit when offsets are present

Signed-off-by: Manan Gupta <[email protected]>

* test: add more DISTINCT end to end tests

Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <[email protected]>

* remove limitation around aggregation and distinct

Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <[email protected]>

---------

Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Manan Gupta <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Manan Gupta <[email protected]>
@harshit-gangal @systay
Fix and Make aggregation planner handle aggregation functions better (v…
561205f 
…itessio#13228)

* handle unpushed aggregation better

Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <[email protected]>

* distinct on aggregator and changed distinct engine primitive to take offset than truncate bool

Signed-off-by: Harshit Gangal <[email protected]>

* handle SUM with the new operator horizon planning

Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <[email protected]>

* empty t10 after running tests

Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <[email protected]>

* add collations and weight_string for aggregations where engine primitive is supported

Signed-off-by: Harshit Gangal <[email protected]>

* compare columns using semantic equality

Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <[email protected]>

* handle grouping expressions that are returned in multiple columns

Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <[email protected]>

* add end2end test to show that query works

Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <[email protected]>

* on aggregate count and sum splittling create new aggr and update the column offset based on where it is pushed

Signed-off-by: Harshit Gangal <[email protected]>

* add waitForAuthoritative for last insert id test

Signed-off-by: Harshit Gangal <[email protected]>

* fix: push nil for min max cases for other side

Signed-off-by: Harshit Gangal <[email protected]>

* saves vtgate startup time as most of the test only have primary

Signed-off-by: Harshit Gangal <[email protected]>

* allow min/max without weight_string, projection to be created always on aggregation pushing with join, compact done later

Signed-off-by: Harshit Gangal <[email protected]>

---------

Signed-off-by: Andres Taylor <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Harshit Gangal <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Andres Taylor <[email protected]>
@vitess-bot vitess-bot bot added NeedsDescriptionUpdate The description is not clear or comprehensive enough, and needs work NeedsIssue A linked issue is missing for this Pull Request NeedsWebsiteDocsUpdate What it says labels Jun 8, 2023
@vitess-bot
Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented Jun 8, 2023

Review Checklist

Hello reviewers! 👋 Please follow this checklist when reviewing this Pull Request.

General

  • Ensure that the Pull Request has a descriptive title.
  • If this is a change that users need to know about, please apply the release notes (needs details) label so that merging is blocked unless the summary release notes document is included.
  • If a test is added or modified, there should be a documentation on top of the test to explain what the expected behavior is what the test does.

If a new flag is being introduced:

  • Is it really necessary to add this flag?
  • Flag names should be clear and intuitive (as far as possible)
  • Help text should be descriptive.
  • Flag names should use dashes (-) as word separators rather than underscores (_).

If a workflow is added or modified:

  • Each item in Jobs should be named in order to mark it as required.
  • If the workflow should be required, the maintainer team should be notified.

Bug fixes

  • There should be at least one unit or end-to-end test.
  • The Pull Request description should include a link to an issue that describes the bug.

Non-trivial changes

  • There should be some code comments as to why things are implemented the way they are.

New/Existing features

  • Should be documented, either by modifying the existing documentation or creating new documentation.
  • New features should have a link to a feature request issue or an RFC that documents the use cases, corner cases and test cases.

Backward compatibility

  • Protobuf changes should be wire-compatible.
  • Changes to _vt tables and RPCs need to be backward compatible.
  • vtctl command output order should be stable and awk-able.
  • RPC changes should be compatible with vitess-operator
  • If a flag is removed, then it should also be removed from VTop, if used there.

@vitess-bot vitess-bot bot mentioned this pull request Jun 8, 2023
Closed
@harshit-gangal harshit-gangal changed the base branch from main to release-17.0 June 8, 2023 20:02
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the v18.0.0 milestone Jun 8, 2023
@harshit-gangal harshit-gangal modified the milestones: v18.0.0, v17.0.0 Jun 8, 2023
@harshit-gangal harshit-gangal removed NeedsDescriptionUpdate The description is not clear or comprehensive enough, and needs work NeedsWebsiteDocsUpdate What it says NeedsIssue A linked issue is missing for this Pull Request labels Jun 8, 2023
@harshit-gangal harshit-gangal reopened this Jun 8, 2023
@frouioui frouioui merged commit 3e74b02 into vitessio:release-17.0 Jun 12, 2023
@frouioui frouioui deleted the r17-13228 branch June 12, 2023 09:23
@jjpersch jjpersch mentioned this pull request Sep 21, 2023
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@systay systay systay approved these changes

@frouioui frouioui frouioui approved these changes

@GuptaManan100 GuptaManan100 Awaiting requested review from GuptaManan100 GuptaManan100 is a code owner

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
Backport This is a backport Component: Query Serving Type: Bug
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v17.0.0
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@harshit-gangal @systay @frouioui