[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-3830?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Shuo Cheng updated CALCITE-3830:
--------------------------------
    Description: 
In planner optimization, the digest  of Aggregate node contains digest of its 
AggregateCall, i.e. Aggregate.toString, but currently 'approximate' filed of 
AggregateCall is not considered in toString() method, which may lead to the 
situation two different relNodes are considered as identical in planner 
optimizing phase. 

Here is an example:
{code:java}
// SQL
select * from (
  select a, count(distinct b) from T group by a
  union all
  select a, approx_count_distinct(b) from T group by a
)

// after applying a rule, the plan is
LogicalSink(name=[_DataStreamTable_1], fields=[a, EXPR$1], __id__=[96])
+- LogicalProject(a=[$0], EXPR$1=[$1], __id__=[94])
   +- LogicalUnion(all=[true], __id__=[92])
      :- LogicalAggregate(group=[{0}], EXPR$1=[COUNT(DISTINCT $1)], __id__=[89])
      :  +- LogicalTableScan(table=[[default, _DataStreamTable_2]], 
__id__=[100])
      +- LogicalAggregate(group=[{0}], EXPR$1=[COUNT(DISTINCT $1)], __id__=[89])
         +- LogicalTableScan(table=[[default, _DataStreamTable_2]], 
__id__=[100])
{code}
As showing in the example, after optimizing, these two Aggregates are 
considered as identical (both with 89 as relNode ID).

  was:
In planner optimization, the digest  of Aggregate node contains digest of its 
AggregateCall, i.e. Aggregate.toString, but currently 'approximate' filed of 
AggregateCall is not considered in toString() method, which may lead to the 
situation two different relNode is considered as identical in planner 
optimizing phase. 

Here is an example:
{code:java}
// SQL
select * from (
  select a, count(distinct b) from T group by a
  union all
  select a, approx_count_distinct(b) from T group by a
)

// after applying a rule, the plan is
LogicalSink(name=[_DataStreamTable_1], fields=[a, EXPR$1], __id__=[96])
+- LogicalProject(a=[$0], EXPR$1=[$1], __id__=[94])
   +- LogicalUnion(all=[true], __id__=[92])
      :- LogicalAggregate(group=[{0}], EXPR$1=[COUNT(DISTINCT $1)], __id__=[89])
      :  +- LogicalTableScan(table=[[default, _DataStreamTable_2]], 
__id__=[100])
      +- LogicalAggregate(group=[{0}], EXPR$1=[COUNT(DISTINCT $1)], __id__=[89])
         +- LogicalTableScan(table=[[default, _DataStreamTable_2]], 
__id__=[100])
{code}
As showing in the example, after optimizing, these two Aggregates are 
considered as identical (both with 89 as relNode ID).


> Digest of AggregateCall do not consider the ‘approximate’ attribute
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CALCITE-3830
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-3830
>             Project: Calcite
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: core
>    Affects Versions: 1.21.0
>            Reporter: Shuo Cheng
>            Priority: Major
>             Fix For: 1.22.0
>
>
> In planner optimization, the digest  of Aggregate node contains digest of its 
> AggregateCall, i.e. Aggregate.toString, but currently 'approximate' filed of 
> AggregateCall is not considered in toString() method, which may lead to the 
> situation two different relNodes are considered as identical in planner 
> optimizing phase. 
> Here is an example:
> {code:java}
> // SQL
> select * from (
>   select a, count(distinct b) from T group by a
>   union all
>   select a, approx_count_distinct(b) from T group by a
> )
> // after applying a rule, the plan is
> LogicalSink(name=[_DataStreamTable_1], fields=[a, EXPR$1], __id__=[96])
> +- LogicalProject(a=[$0], EXPR$1=[$1], __id__=[94])
>    +- LogicalUnion(all=[true], __id__=[92])
>       :- LogicalAggregate(group=[{0}], EXPR$1=[COUNT(DISTINCT $1)], 
> __id__=[89])
>       :  +- LogicalTableScan(table=[[default, _DataStreamTable_2]], 
> __id__=[100])
>       +- LogicalAggregate(group=[{0}], EXPR$1=[COUNT(DISTINCT $1)], 
> __id__=[89])
>          +- LogicalTableScan(table=[[default, _DataStreamTable_2]], 
> __id__=[100])
> {code}
> As showing in the example, after optimizing, these two Aggregates are 
> considered as identical (both with 89 as relNode ID).



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)

Reply via email to