Stop copying LogicalPlan and Exprs in `OptimizeProjections` (2% faster planning) #10405

alamb · 2024-05-07T11:19:00Z

Note this also has the changes from #10410 in it

Which issue does this PR close?

Closes #10209

Rationale for this change

Make planning faster by not copying as much

What changes are included in this PR?

Rewrite OptimizeProjections to use treenode APIs

Are these changes tested?

Existing tests

Are there any user-facing changes?

More types of projections can be combined (e.g. CASE expressions)
Faster planning

Benchmark Results show a moderate improvement (2% overall in tpch, but some queries like Q3 are like 10% faster)

Details

++ critcmp main projection_pushdown
group                                         main                                   projection_pushdown
-----                                         ----                                   -------------------
logical_aggregate_with_join                   1.01  1217.9±11.93µs        ? ?/sec    1.00  1208.1±12.12µs        ? ?/sec
logical_plan_tpcds_all                        1.00    160.7±1.72ms        ? ?/sec    1.00    160.6±1.78ms        ? ?/sec
logical_plan_tpch_all                         1.02     17.1±0.20ms        ? ?/sec    1.00     16.8±0.21ms        ? ?/sec
logical_select_all_from_1000                  1.00     18.7±0.14ms        ? ?/sec    1.01     18.9±0.11ms        ? ?/sec
logical_select_one_from_700                   1.01    820.9±9.73µs        ? ?/sec    1.00   816.1±20.75µs        ? ?/sec
logical_trivial_join_high_numbered_columns    1.00   765.5±18.71µs        ? ?/sec    1.00   764.8±64.26µs        ? ?/sec
logical_trivial_join_low_numbered_columns     1.01    749.8±8.67µs        ? ?/sec    1.00    742.3±7.49µs        ? ?/sec
physical_plan_tpcds_all                       1.03  1364.1±11.01ms        ? ?/sec    1.00  1330.1±16.93ms        ? ?/sec
physical_plan_tpch_all                        1.03     94.8±1.43ms        ? ?/sec    1.00     92.1±1.28ms        ? ?/sec
physical_plan_tpch_q1                         1.06      5.2±0.05ms        ? ?/sec    1.00      4.9±0.07ms        ? ?/sec
physical_plan_tpch_q10                        1.03      4.4±0.06ms        ? ?/sec    1.00      4.3±0.08ms        ? ?/sec
physical_plan_tpch_q11                        1.02      3.9±0.06ms        ? ?/sec    1.00      3.8±0.08ms        ? ?/sec
physical_plan_tpch_q12                        1.00      3.0±0.04ms        ? ?/sec    1.02      3.1±0.06ms        ? ?/sec
physical_plan_tpch_q13                        1.03      2.1±0.04ms        ? ?/sec    1.00      2.1±0.03ms        ? ?/sec
physical_plan_tpch_q14                        1.08      2.9±0.07ms        ? ?/sec    1.00      2.7±0.04ms        ? ?/sec
physical_plan_tpch_q16                        1.06      3.8±0.06ms        ? ?/sec    1.00      3.6±0.05ms        ? ?/sec
physical_plan_tpch_q17                        1.04      3.6±0.07ms        ? ?/sec    1.00      3.5±0.07ms        ? ?/sec
physical_plan_tpch_q18                        1.07      4.1±0.05ms        ? ?/sec    1.00      3.9±0.05ms        ? ?/sec
physical_plan_tpch_q19                        1.10      6.5±0.07ms        ? ?/sec    1.00      5.9±0.07ms        ? ?/sec
physical_plan_tpch_q2                         1.04      8.0±0.04ms        ? ?/sec    1.00      7.7±0.09ms        ? ?/sec
physical_plan_tpch_q20                        1.04      4.8±0.06ms        ? ?/sec    1.00      4.6±0.06ms        ? ?/sec
physical_plan_tpch_q21                        1.02      6.4±0.08ms        ? ?/sec    1.00      6.2±0.06ms        ? ?/sec
physical_plan_tpch_q22                        1.00      3.4±0.06ms        ? ?/sec    1.00      3.4±0.08ms        ? ?/sec
physical_plan_tpch_q3                         1.11      3.4±0.07ms        ? ?/sec    1.00      3.1±0.06ms        ? ?/sec
physical_plan_tpch_q4                         1.12      2.5±0.04ms        ? ?/sec    1.00      2.2±0.02ms        ? ?/sec
physical_plan_tpch_q5                         1.09      4.8±0.05ms        ? ?/sec    1.00      4.4±0.06ms        ? ?/sec
physical_plan_tpch_q6                         1.05  1615.2±30.14µs        ? ?/sec    1.00  1543.2±24.24µs        ? ?/sec
physical_plan_tpch_q7                         1.03      5.9±0.06ms        ? ?/sec    1.00      5.7±0.09ms        ? ?/sec
physical_plan_tpch_q8                         1.02      7.5±0.15ms        ? ?/sec    1.00      7.4±0.08ms        ? ?/sec
physical_plan_tpch_q9                         1.01      5.6±0.07ms        ? ?/sec    1.00      5.5±0.11ms        ? ?/sec
physical_select_all_from_1000                 1.01     61.5±0.34ms        ? ?/sec    1.00     61.2±0.52ms        ? ?/sec
physical_select_one_from_700                  1.02      3.7±0.05ms        ? ?/sec    1.00      3.6±0.04ms        ? ?/sec

alamb · 2024-05-07T11:26:26Z

datafusion/optimizer/src/optimize_projections/mod.rs

        let table_scan = test_table_scan()?;
        let plan = LogicalPlanBuilder::from(table_scan)
-            .project(vec![col("a"), lit(0).alias("d")])?
+            .project(vec![col("a").add(lit(1)).alias("a"), lit(0).alias("d")])?


Without this change the projection is actually merged

This is due to using the general purpose transform_up rather than special casing certain Expr types in the projection rewrite and now CASE is handled

In order to prevent merging the projections, I needed to make the lower projection non trivial so changed it from a to a + 1 as a

Note that the tests for correctness added for #8942 in
#8960 such as consecutive_projection_same_schema are also still passing

alamb · 2024-05-07T13:49:20Z

datafusion/sqllogictest/test_files/cte.slt

-02)--SubqueryAlias: NUMBERS
-03)----Projection: Int64(1) AS a, Int64(2) AS b, Int64(3) AS c
-04)------EmptyRelation
+01)SubqueryAlias: NUMBERS


I believe these plans are better -- they have one less unecessary Projection (I believe the changes are due to better tracking of child rewrites during optimization)

alamb · 2024-05-07T14:25:52Z

datafusion/expr/src/expr.rs

        }
    }

+    /// Recursively potentially multiple aliases from an expression.


This is trim_expr renamed and with examples

alamb · 2024-05-07T14:26:50Z

datafusion/optimizer/src/optimize_projections/mod.rs

+) -> Result<Transformed<LogicalPlan>> {
+    // Recursively rewrite any nodes that may be able to avoid computation given
+    // their parents' required indices.
+    match plan {


The order of handling plan nodes changed so the ones that rewrite the plan directly do so in the first match statement and those that compute required indices do so in a second match

alamb · 2024-05-07T14:27:40Z

datafusion/optimizer/src/optimize_projections/mod.rs

+/// - `Err(error)`: An error occurred during the optimization process.
 fn optimize_projections(
-    plan: &LogicalPlan,
+    plan: LogicalPlan,


the fact this function no takes plan rather than plan is the key change that permits this PR to avoid copying as much

comphead · 2024-05-07T21:52:28Z

datafusion/sqllogictest/test_files/cte.slt

-06)------Projection: nodes.id + Int64(1) AS id
-07)--------Filter: nodes.id < Int64(10)
-08)----------TableScan: nodes
+01)SubqueryAlias: nodes


so in fact it removes another projection layer?

Yes that is correct

comphead · 2024-05-07T22:19:29Z

datafusion/optimizer/src/optimize_projections/mod.rs

        }
        LogicalPlan::Window(window) => {
-            let input_schema = window.input.schema();
+            let input_schema = window.input.schema().clone();


do we need this clone?

comphead · 2024-05-07T22:26:31Z

datafusion/expr/src/logical_plan/plan.rs

+                let input_schema = inputs[0].schema();
+                // If inputs are not pruned do not change schema
+                // TODO this seems wrong (shouldn't we always use the schema of the input?)
+                let schema = if schema.fields().len() == input_schema.fields().len() {


that shouldn't happen.... we can follow up to run tests with only 1 schema

I agree it doesn't make sense -- however, it is the same logic as in with_new_exprs:

datafusion/datafusion/expr/src/logical_plan/plan.rs

Lines 913 to 925 in fad16e7

LogicalPlan::Union(Union { schema, .. }) => {

let input_schema = inputs[0].schema();

// If inputs are not pruned do not change schema.

let schema = if schema.fields().len() == input_schema.fields().len() {

schema.clone()

} else {

input_schema.clone()

};

Ok(LogicalPlan::Union(Union {

inputs: inputs.into_iter().map(Arc::new).collect(),

schema,

}))

}

Filed #10442

comphead

lgtm thanks @alamb for making tha planner better

alamb · 2024-05-10T15:10:40Z

Thanks for the review @comphead

fyi @mustafasrepo

…r planning) (apache#10405) * Add `LogicalPlan::recompute_schema` for handling rewrite passes * Stop copying LogicalPlan and Exprs in `OptimizeProjections`

github-actions bot added logical-expr Logical plan and expressions optimizer Optimizer rules labels May 7, 2024

alamb force-pushed the alamb/projection_pushdown branch from 3e8264c to 6bbc24d Compare May 7, 2024 11:20

github-actions bot removed the logical-expr Logical plan and expressions label May 7, 2024

alamb commented May 7, 2024

View reviewed changes

github-actions bot added logical-expr Logical plan and expressions sqllogictest SQL Logic Tests (.slt) labels May 7, 2024

alamb commented May 7, 2024

View reviewed changes

alamb force-pushed the alamb/projection_pushdown branch from 4a7aa33 to f80b800 Compare May 7, 2024 14:22

alamb commented May 7, 2024

View reviewed changes

alamb mentioned this pull request May 7, 2024

Add LogicalPlan::recompute_schema for handling rewrite passes #10410

Closed

alamb force-pushed the alamb/projection_pushdown branch 2 times, most recently from ac5c77e to 43d8f0e Compare May 7, 2024 15:18

alamb marked this pull request as ready for review May 7, 2024 17:01

alamb marked this pull request as draft May 7, 2024 17:01

alamb added 2 commits May 7, 2024 13:01

Add LogicalPlan::recompute_schema for handling rewrite passes

fad16e7

Stop copying LogicalPlan and Exprs in OptimizeProjections

b15d1f4

alamb force-pushed the alamb/projection_pushdown branch from 43d8f0e to b15d1f4 Compare May 7, 2024 17:03

alamb changed the title ~~Stop copying LogicalPlan and Exprs in OptimizeProjections~~ Stop copying LogicalPlan and Exprs in OptimizeProjections (2% faster planning) May 7, 2024

alamb marked this pull request as ready for review May 7, 2024 17:25

comphead reviewed May 7, 2024

View reviewed changes

comphead mentioned this pull request May 10, 2024

Unify schema usage in Datafusion #10442

Open

comphead approved these changes May 10, 2024

View reviewed changes

comphead merged commit cf0cba7 into apache:main May 10, 2024

alamb deleted the alamb/projection_pushdown branch May 10, 2024 15:10

	LogicalPlan::Union(Union { schema, .. }) => {
	let input_schema = inputs[0].schema();
	// If inputs are not pruned do not change schema.
	let schema = if schema.fields().len() == input_schema.fields().len() {
	schema.clone()
	} else {
	input_schema.clone()
	};
	Ok(LogicalPlan::Union(Union {
	inputs: inputs.into_iter().map(Arc::new).collect(),
	schema,
	}))
	}

Stop copying LogicalPlan and Exprs in OptimizeProjections (2% faster planning) #10405

Stop copying LogicalPlan and Exprs in OptimizeProjections (2% faster planning) #10405

Uh oh!

Conversation

alamb commented May 7, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Which issue does this PR close?

Rationale for this change

What changes are included in this PR?

Are these changes tested?

Are there any user-facing changes?

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

alamb May 7, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

comphead left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

alamb commented May 10, 2024

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

Stop copying LogicalPlan and Exprs in `OptimizeProjections` (2% faster planning) #10405

Stop copying LogicalPlan and Exprs in `OptimizeProjections` (2% faster planning) #10405

alamb commented May 7, 2024 •

edited

Loading

alamb May 7, 2024 •

edited

Loading