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

Engine primitive for join-values #17518

Open
wants to merge 8 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Engine primitive for join-values #17518

wants to merge 8 commits into from
+519 −93

Conversation

frouioui
Copy link
Member

@frouioui frouioui commented Jan 14, 2025 •
edited by systay
Loading

Description

This PR introduces the engine primitive for executing joins using the VALUES statement instead of a nested loop. This approach reduces network traffic and minimizes the number of queries executed. More details on this feature can be found in the related issue: #16508.

Related Issue(s)

@vitess-bot vitess-bot
Copy link
Contributor

vitess-bot bot commented Jan 14, 2025

Review Checklist

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

General

  • Ensure that the Pull Request has a descriptive title.
  • Ensure there is a link to an issue (except for internal cleanup and flaky test fixes), new features should have an RFC that documents use cases and test cases.

Tests

  • Bug fixes should have at least one unit or end-to-end test, enhancement and new features should have a sufficient number of tests.

Documentation

  • Apply the release notes (needs details) label if users need to know about this change.
  • New features should be documented.
  • There should be some code comments as to why things are implemented the way they are.
  • There should be a comment at the top of each new or modified test to explain what the test does.

New flags

  • Is this flag really necessary?
  • Flag names must be clear and intuitive, use dashes (-), and have a clear help text.

If a workflow is added or modified:

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

Backward compatibility

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

@vitess-bot vitess-bot bot added NeedsBackportReason If backport labels have been applied to a PR, a justification is required 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 Jan 14, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the v22.0.0 milestone Jan 14, 2025
@frouioui frouioui added Type: Enhancement Logical improvement (somewhere between a bug and feature) Component: Query Serving and removed NeedsWebsiteDocsUpdate What it says NeedsIssue A linked issue is missing for this Pull Request NeedsBackportReason If backport labels have been applied to a PR, a justification is required labels Jan 15, 2025
@frouioui frouioui changed the title Add the ValuesJoin engine primitive Optimize Join Operations with VALUES Statement Jan 15, 2025
@frouioui frouioui changed the title Optimize Join Operations with VALUES Statement Optimize Join Operations with VALUES Statement Jan 15, 2025
@systay systay changed the title Optimize Join Operations with VALUES Statement Engine primitive for join-values Jan 16, 2025
@systay systay removed the NeedsDescriptionUpdate The description is not clear or comprehensive enough, and needs work label Jan 16, 2025
@codecov Codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 22, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 41.30435% with 54 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 67.73%. Comparing base (d1aa2f4) to head (e9fb2c7).
Report is 18 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
go/vt/vtgate/engine/join_values.go 39.72% 44 Missing ⚠️
go/vt/vtgate/evalengine/eval.go 0.00% 9 Missing ⚠️
go/vt/vtgate/evalengine/eval_tuple.go 85.71% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files 
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #17518      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   67.68%   67.73%   +0.04%     
==========================================
  Files        1586     1587       +1     
  Lines      255170   255813     +643     
==========================================
+ Hits       172722   173285     +563     
- Misses      82448    82528      +80

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@frouioui frouioui marked this pull request as ready for review January 28, 2025 14:20
harshit-gangal
harshit-gangal reviewed Feb 5, 2025
View reviewed changes
go/vt/vtgate/engine/join_values_test.go
Comment on lines +31 to +35
/*
select col1, col2, col3, col4, col5, col6 from left join right on left.col1 = right.col4
LHS: select col1, col2, col3 from left
RHS: select col5, col6, id from (values row(1,2), ...) left(id,col1) join right on left.col1 = right.col4
*/
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

nit: the example query does not have id column but RHS has in the select.
output shows col4 but it is not present in LHS or RHS

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@harshit-gangal harshit-gangal harshit-gangal left review comments

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

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

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

At least 2 approving reviews are required to merge this pull request.

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
Component: Query Serving Type: Enhancement Logical improvement (somewhere between a bug and feature)
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v22.0.0
Development

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