[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6073?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15949735#comment-15949735
]
radu commented on FLINK-6073:
-----------------------------
[~fhueske] [~shijinkui] [~Yuhong_kyo] [~sunjincheng121] [~twalthr]
[~stefano.bortoli]
Just to recap the discussion so far to covert towards a conclusion.
Currently there are 2 options for supporting inner joins:
Option 1: Implement the inner query based on the strongly typed query model
mentioned.
{code}
SELECT A1, B1 FROM T1, T2
WHERE T1.A3 =
(SELECT Max(T1.A3) FROM T1 WHERE T1.A3 <= T2.B3)
{code}
In this case we would implement a rule to detect the complex translation
pattern and convert it to a simple implementation
Option 2: Implement the inner query based on a simplified (i.e., implicit link)
between the outer query and inner query. This can be done for a query like:
{code}
SELECT B1, (SELECT A1 as ab FROM T1 WHERE proctime() BETWEEN current_timestamp
- INTERVAL '1' HOUR AND current_timestamp LIMIT 1) FROM T2
{code}
In such a query the implicit assumption is that the current_timestamp comes
from the outer query. The reasoning for this is that always the outer query is
the one that drives the query (a result is emitted only when something arrives
from the main stream), hence the current_timestamp would come from the mai
stream, while the proctime would refer to the property time carried by each
event (in this case the ingestion time). Moreover this syntax offer an
equivalency with the batch query where the selection would be done using the
now() function to filter based on time
> Support for SQL inner queries for proctime
> ------------------------------------------
>
> Key: FLINK-6073
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-6073
> Project: Flink
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: Table API & SQL
> Reporter: radu
> Assignee: radu
> Priority: Critical
> Labels: features
> Attachments: innerquery.png
>
>
> Time target: Proc Time
> **SQL targeted query examples:**
>
> Q1) `Select item, (select item2 from stream2 ) as itemExtern from stream1;`
> Comments: This is the main functionality targeted by this JIRA to enable to
> combine in the main query results from an inner query.
> Q2) `Select s1.item, (Select a2 from table as t2 where table.id = s1.id
> limit 1) from s1;`
> Comments:
> Another equivalent way to write the first example of inner query is with
> limit 1. This ensures the equivalency with the SingleElementAggregation used
> when translated the main target syntax for inner query. We must ensure that
> the 2 syntaxes are supported and implemented with the same functionality.
> There is the option also to select elements in the inner query from a table
> not just from a different stream. This should be a sub-JIRA issue implement
> this support.
> **Description:**
> Parsing the SQL inner query via calcite is translated to a join function
> (left join with always true condition) between the output of the query on the
> main stream and the output of a single output aggregation operation on the
> inner query. The translation logic is shown below
> ```
> LogicalJoin [condition=true;type=LEFT]
> LogicalSingleValue[type=aggregation]
> …logic of inner query (LogicalProject, LogicalScan…)
> …logical of main,external query (LogicalProject, LogicalScan…))
> ```
> `LogicalJoin[condition=true;type=LEFT] `– it can be considered as a special
> case operation rather than a proper join to be implemented between
> stream-to-stream. The implementation behavior should attach to the main
> stream output a value from a different query.
> `LogicalSingleValue[type=aggregation]` – it can be interpreted as the holder
> of the single value that results from the inner query. As this operator is
> the guarantee that the inner query will bring to the join no more than one
> value, there are several options on how to consider it’s functionality in the
> streaming context:
> 1. Throw an error if the inner query returns more than one result. This
> would be a typical behavior in the case of standard SQL over DB. However, it
> is very unlikely that a stream would only emit a single value. Therefore,
> such a behavior would be very limited for streams in the inner query.
> However, such a behavior might be more useful and common if the inner query
> is over a table.
> 1. We can interpret the usage of this parameter as the guarantee that at
> one moment only one value is selected. Therefore the behavior would rather be
> as a filter to select one value. This brings the option that the output of
> this operator evolves in time with the second stream that drives the inner
> query. The decision on when to evolve the stream should depend on what marks
> the evolution of the stream (processing time, watermarks/event time,
> ingestion time, window time partitions…).
> In this JIRA issue the evolution would be marked by the processing time. For
> this implementation the operator would work based on option 2. Hence at every
> moment the state of the operator that holds one value can evolve with the
> last elements. In this way the logic of the inner query is to select always
> the last element (fields, or other query related transformations based on the
> last value). This behavior is needed in many scenarios: (e.g., the typical
> problem of computing the total income, when incomes are in multiple
> currencies and the total needs to be computed in one currency by using always
> the last exchange rate).
> This behavior is motivated also by the functionality of the 3rd SQL query
> example – Q3 (using inner query as the input source for FROM ). In such
> scenarios, the selection in the main query would need to be done based on
> latest elements. Therefore with such a behavior the 2 types of queries (Q1
> and Q3) would provide the same, intuitive result.
> **Functionality example**
> Based on the logical translation plan, we exemplify next the behavior of the
> inner query applied on 2 streams that operate on processing time.
> SELECT amount, (SELECT exchange FROM inputstream1) AS field1 FROM inputstream2
> ||Time||Stream1||Stream2||Output||
> |T1| | 1.2| |
> |T2|User1,10| | (10,1.2)|
> |T3|User2,11| | (11,1.2)|
> |T4| | 1.3| |
> |T5|User3,9 | | (9,1.3)|
> |...|
> Note 1. For streams that would operate on event time, at moment T3 we would
> need to retract the previous outputs ((10, 1.2), (11,1.2) ) and reemit them
> as ((10,1.3), (11,1.3) ).
> Note 2. Rather than failing when a new value comes in the inner query we just
> update the state that holds the single value. If option 1 for the behavior of
> LogicalSingleValue is chosen, than an error should be triggered at moment T3.
> **Implementation option**
> Considering the notes and the option for the behavior the operator would be
> implemented by using the join function of flink with a custom always true
> join condition and an inner selection for the output based on the incoming
> direction (to mimic the left join). The single value selection can be
> implemented over a statefull flat map. In case the join is executed in
> parallel by multiple operators, than we either use a parallelism of 1 for the
> statefull flatmap (option 1) or we broadcast the outputs of the flatmap to
> all join instances to ensure consistency of the results (option 2).
> Considering that the flatMap functionality of selecting one value is light,
> option 1 is better. The design schema is shown below.
> !innerquery.png!
> **General logic of Join**
> ```
> leftDataStream.join(rightDataStream)
> .where(new ConstantConditionSelector())
> .equalTo(new ConstantConditionSelector())
> .window(window.create())
> .trigger(new LeftFireTrigger())
> .evictor(new Evictor())
> .apply(JoinFunction());
> ```
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
