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.

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

[BugFix] Cached fragment misuses exogenous runtime filter (backport #51150) #51200

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

mergify[bot]
Copy link
Contributor

@mergify mergify bot commented Sep 20, 2024

Why I'm doing:

image
Cached fragment(Fragment 0) should not use exogenous runtime filters produced by remote fragment(Fragment 2's HashJoin(2) ), since the HashJoin(2)'s runtime filter changes as its the right side changes. so we should disable query cache in this situation.

When we take this into conderation , we use PlanFragment.get{Build,Probe}RuntimeFilters methods to obtain fragment-specific runtime filter informations that are not be collected before using.

What I'm doing:

Collection runtime filter build/probe information in PlanFragmentBuilder

+        fragments.forEach(PlanFragment::collectBuildRuntimeFilters);
+        fragments.forEach(PlanFragment::collectProbeRuntimeFilters);

Fixes #issue

What type of PR is this:

  • BugFix
  • Feature
  • Enhancement
  • Refactor
  • UT
  • Doc
  • Tool

Does this PR entail a change in behavior?

  • Yes, this PR will result in a change in behavior.
  • No, this PR will not result in a change in behavior.

If yes, please specify the type of change:

  • Interface/UI changes: syntax, type conversion, expression evaluation, display information
  • Parameter changes: default values, similar parameters but with different default values
  • Policy changes: use new policy to replace old one, functionality automatically enabled
  • Feature removed
  • Miscellaneous: upgrade & downgrade compatibility, etc.

Checklist:

  • I have added test cases for my bug fix or my new feature
  • This pr needs user documentation (for new or modified features or behaviors)
    • I have added documentation for my new feature or new function
  • This is a backport pr

Bugfix cherry-pick branch check:

  • I have checked the version labels which the pr will be auto-backported to the target branch
    • 3.3
    • 3.2
    • 3.1
    • 3.0
    • 2.5

This is an automatic backport of pull request #51150 done by [Mergify](https://mergify.com). ## Why I'm doing: ![image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/49eb87f9-97b5-40ca-9804-7f6519c4e19b) Cached fragment(Fragment 0) should not use exogenous runtime filters produced by remote fragment(Fragment 2's HashJoin(2) ), since the HashJoin(2)'s runtime filter changes as its the right side changes. so we should disable query cache in this situation.

When we take this into conderation , we use PlanFragment.get{Build,Probe}RuntimeFilters methods to obtain fragment-specific runtime filter informations that are not be collected before using.

What I'm doing:

Collection runtime filter build/probe information in PlanFragmentBuilder

+        fragments.forEach(PlanFragment::collectBuildRuntimeFilters);
+        fragments.forEach(PlanFragment::collectProbeRuntimeFilters);

Fixes #issue

What type of PR is this:

  • BugFix
  • Feature
  • Enhancement
  • Refactor
  • UT
  • Doc
  • Tool

Does this PR entail a change in behavior?

  • Yes, this PR will result in a change in behavior.
  • No, this PR will not result in a change in behavior.

If yes, please specify the type of change:

  • Interface/UI changes: syntax, type conversion, expression evaluation, display information
  • Parameter changes: default values, similar parameters but with different default values
  • Policy changes: use new policy to replace old one, functionality automatically enabled
  • Feature removed
  • Miscellaneous: upgrade & downgrade compatibility, etc.

Checklist:

  • I have added test cases for my bug fix or my new feature
  • This pr needs user documentation (for new or modified features or behaviors)
    • I have added documentation for my new feature or new function
  • This is a backport pr

Signed-off-by: satanson <[email protected]>
(cherry picked from commit 427d13b)

# Conflicts:
#	fe/fe-core/src/main/java/com/starrocks/planner/PlanFragment.java
#	fe/fe-core/src/main/java/com/starrocks/qe/DefaultCoordinator.java
#	fe/fe-core/src/test/java/com/starrocks/sql/plan/ReplayFromDumpTest.java
Copy link
Contributor Author

mergify bot commented Sep 20, 2024

Cherry-pick of 427d13b has failed:

On branch mergify/bp/branch-3.1/pr-51150
Your branch is up to date with 'origin/branch-3.1'.

You are currently cherry-picking commit 427d13b300.
  (fix conflicts and run "git cherry-pick --continue")
  (use "git cherry-pick --skip" to skip this patch)
  (use "git cherry-pick --abort" to cancel the cherry-pick operation)

Changes to be committed:
	modified:   fe/fe-core/src/main/java/com/starrocks/planner/FragmentNormalizer.java
	modified:   fe/fe-core/src/main/java/com/starrocks/sql/plan/PlanFragmentBuilder.java
	new file:   fe/fe-core/src/test/resources/sql/query_dump/query_cache_misuse_exogenous_runtime_filter.json

Unmerged paths:
  (use "git add/rm <file>..." as appropriate to mark resolution)
	both modified:   fe/fe-core/src/main/java/com/starrocks/planner/PlanFragment.java
	deleted by us:   fe/fe-core/src/main/java/com/starrocks/qe/DefaultCoordinator.java
	both modified:   fe/fe-core/src/test/java/com/starrocks/sql/plan/ReplayFromDumpTest.java

To fix up this pull request, you can check it out locally. See documentation: https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/collaborating-with-pull-requests/reviewing-changes-in-pull-requests/checking-out-pull-requests-locally

Copy link
Contributor Author

mergify bot commented Sep 20, 2024

@mergify[bot]: Backport conflict, please reslove the conflict and resubmit the pr

auto-merge was automatically disabled September 20, 2024 06:19

Pull request was closed

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant