github-actions[bot] commented on code in PR #68646:
URL: https://github.com/apache/doris/pull/68646#discussion_r4142713196
##########
fe/fe-core/src/main/java/org/apache/doris/mtmv/MTMVRelationManager.java:
##########
@@ -349,34 +357,140 @@ public void dropTable(Table table) {
// because a dropped table is the one change whose query is gone
beyond doubt. What the two record
// is the same state either way. Unlike a rename it stays an
invalidation: the table is gone for
// good, so the state is not something a later alter can make obsolete.
- processBaseTableChange(new BaseTableInfo(table), "The base table has
been deleted:", false);
+ processBaseTableChange(new BaseTableInfo(table), "The base table has
been deleted:", null);
}
/**
* update mtmv status to `SCHEMA_CHANGE`.
*
* @param isReplace
+ * @param queryJudgedColumns the names the alter gives the table or takes
away from it, which leave the
+ * judgement about each MV's state to that MV's
own query, or null when the
+ * alter is not one a query decides. The names
are carried rather than judged
+ * before the call because the judgement is
about them; see
+ * {@code AlterOp#queryJudgedColumnNames} for
which operations name one, and
+ * {@link #invalidateMvUnlessQueryHolds} for
what is asked about it. A rename
+ * of the base table names no column: it is left
to the record below, which
+ * says what the MV that keeps spelling the old
name needs to hear
*/
@Override
- public void alterTable(BaseTableInfo oldTableInfo, Optional<BaseTableInfo>
newTableInfo, boolean isReplace) {
+ public void alterTable(BaseTableInfo oldTableInfo, Optional<BaseTableInfo>
newTableInfo, boolean isReplace,
+ QueryJudgedChange queryJudgedChange) {
// when replace, need deal two table
if (isReplace) {
// REPLACE TABLE already invalidates the IVM baseline explicitly,
see Alter#processReplaceTable
- processBaseTableChange(newTableInfo.get(), "The base table has
been updated:", false);
+ processBaseTableChange(newTableInfo.get(), "The base table has
been updated:", null);
}
- boolean renamed = !isReplace && newTableInfo.isPresent()
- && !Objects.equals(oldTableInfo.getTableName(),
newTableInfo.get().getTableName());
- // A rename is the one change whose query check is skipped: the MV
query keeps spelling the old
- // name, so it is unanalyzable by construction, and the reason it
would be invalidated with --
- // "the query is no longer analyzable" -- says less than the message
this call records anyway.
- boolean checkQueryUsable = !renamed;
- processBaseTableChange(oldTableInfo, "The base table has been
updated:", checkQueryUsable);
+ processBaseTableChange(oldTableInfo, "The base table has been
updated:", queryJudgedChange);
}
/**
- * An MV's query is only as good as the base table schema it was analyzed
against. Re-analyzing the
- * MV query here (right after the alter was applied) is what detects a
changed column identity:
+ * Whether the query, as it is analysed now, reads a column of any of
these names, and reads it where
+ * the change can reach it.
+ *
+ * <p>There are two places a name is the change's to answer for. One is a
column of the table the change
+ * is about: that is the column this view's rows were computed from, and
the names are matched
+ * case-insensitively because a name is what moves. The other is a column
the query reaches across a
+ * scope boundary -- the plan records those on the Apply that stands for
the subquery, whose correlation
+ * slots are the outer columns its right side reads -- because such a name
is the scopes' to answer for
+ * rather than the query's: the nearest column to the reference answers
for it, so a column the change
+ * takes away from a scope inside leaves the name to one outside, and a
column it gives to a scope inside
+ * takes the name over. A name reached with the qualifier of another table
inside the query's own scope
+ * is neither: no later change can move it, so one to a column it does not
name is one this view's rows
+ * do not depend on.
+ */
+ private static boolean reachesAnyColumnOf(Plan plan, BaseTableInfo
baseTableInfo, Set<String> columnNames) {
+ if (plan == null) {
+ // A query whose plan was not kept is one this cannot be answered
about, and "it does" is the
+ // answer that keeps the view safe.
+ return true;
+ }
+ Set<String> names = Sets.newTreeSet(String.CASE_INSENSITIVE_ORDER);
+ names.addAll(columnNames);
+ LineageInfo lineage = LineageInfoExtractor.extractLineageInfo(plan);
+ for (SetMultimap<?, Expression> byType :
lineage.getDirectLineageMap().values()) {
+ if (reachesAnyColumn(byType.values(), names, baseTableInfo)) {
+ return true;
+ }
+ }
+ // The dataset predicates once, not once per output column: the
per-output copy of them the lineage
+ // also offers holds the same expressions for every column the query
produces, and scanning it would
+ // visit each of them once per column.
+ if (reachesAnyColumn(lineage.getDatasetIndirectLineageMap().values(),
names, baseTableInfo)) {
+ return true;
+ }
+ if (reachesAnyColumnOfASubquery(plan, names, baseTableInfo)) {
+ return true;
+ }
+ return reachesAnyColumnAcrossScopes(plan, lineage, names,
baseTableInfo);
Review Comment:
[P1] Preserve the pre-DROP dependency when a nested alias takes its name. A
refreshed MV of `SELECT o.id FROM outer_t o WHERE EXISTS (SELECT 1 AS flag,
COUNT(*) AS n FROM inner_t i GROUP BY flag HAVING flag=1)` is empty with
`i.flag=0`. After a light `DROP COLUMN flag`, the unqualified GROUP BY and
HAVING references inside the stored subquery bind the constant SELECT alias, so
the query now returns `o.id` with the same MV schema. The post-change lineage
and Apply checks here see no `inner_t.flag` or correlation slot, leave the MV
NORMAL, and its old rewrite snapshot can serve the missing row. This is
distinct from the existing outer-column fallback thread: the new binding is an
alias. Compare the pre-change binding or invalidate this alias fallback.
##########
fe/fe-core/src/main/java/org/apache/doris/mtmv/MTMVRelationManager.java:
##########
@@ -349,34 +357,140 @@ public void dropTable(Table table) {
// because a dropped table is the one change whose query is gone
beyond doubt. What the two record
// is the same state either way. Unlike a rename it stays an
invalidation: the table is gone for
// good, so the state is not something a later alter can make obsolete.
- processBaseTableChange(new BaseTableInfo(table), "The base table has
been deleted:", false);
+ processBaseTableChange(new BaseTableInfo(table), "The base table has
been deleted:", null);
}
/**
* update mtmv status to `SCHEMA_CHANGE`.
*
* @param isReplace
+ * @param queryJudgedColumns the names the alter gives the table or takes
away from it, which leave the
+ * judgement about each MV's state to that MV's
own query, or null when the
+ * alter is not one a query decides. The names
are carried rather than judged
+ * before the call because the judgement is
about them; see
+ * {@code AlterOp#queryJudgedColumnNames} for
which operations name one, and
+ * {@link #invalidateMvUnlessQueryHolds} for
what is asked about it. A rename
+ * of the base table names no column: it is left
to the record below, which
+ * says what the MV that keeps spelling the old
name needs to hear
*/
@Override
- public void alterTable(BaseTableInfo oldTableInfo, Optional<BaseTableInfo>
newTableInfo, boolean isReplace) {
+ public void alterTable(BaseTableInfo oldTableInfo, Optional<BaseTableInfo>
newTableInfo, boolean isReplace,
+ QueryJudgedChange queryJudgedChange) {
// when replace, need deal two table
if (isReplace) {
// REPLACE TABLE already invalidates the IVM baseline explicitly,
see Alter#processReplaceTable
- processBaseTableChange(newTableInfo.get(), "The base table has
been updated:", false);
+ processBaseTableChange(newTableInfo.get(), "The base table has
been updated:", null);
}
- boolean renamed = !isReplace && newTableInfo.isPresent()
- && !Objects.equals(oldTableInfo.getTableName(),
newTableInfo.get().getTableName());
- // A rename is the one change whose query check is skipped: the MV
query keeps spelling the old
- // name, so it is unanalyzable by construction, and the reason it
would be invalidated with --
- // "the query is no longer analyzable" -- says less than the message
this call records anyway.
- boolean checkQueryUsable = !renamed;
- processBaseTableChange(oldTableInfo, "The base table has been
updated:", checkQueryUsable);
+ processBaseTableChange(oldTableInfo, "The base table has been
updated:", queryJudgedChange);
}
/**
- * An MV's query is only as good as the base table schema it was analyzed
against. Re-analyzing the
- * MV query here (right after the alter was applied) is what detects a
changed column identity:
+ * Whether the query, as it is analysed now, reads a column of any of
these names, and reads it where
+ * the change can reach it.
+ *
+ * <p>There are two places a name is the change's to answer for. One is a
column of the table the change
+ * is about: that is the column this view's rows were computed from, and
the names are matched
+ * case-insensitively because a name is what moves. The other is a column
the query reaches across a
+ * scope boundary -- the plan records those on the Apply that stands for
the subquery, whose correlation
+ * slots are the outer columns its right side reads -- because such a name
is the scopes' to answer for
+ * rather than the query's: the nearest column to the reference answers
for it, so a column the change
+ * takes away from a scope inside leaves the name to one outside, and a
column it gives to a scope inside
+ * takes the name over. A name reached with the qualifier of another table
inside the query's own scope
+ * is neither: no later change can move it, so one to a column it does not
name is one this view's rows
+ * do not depend on.
+ */
+ private static boolean reachesAnyColumnOf(Plan plan, BaseTableInfo
baseTableInfo, Set<String> columnNames) {
+ if (plan == null) {
+ // A query whose plan was not kept is one this cannot be answered
about, and "it does" is the
+ // answer that keeps the view safe.
+ return true;
+ }
+ Set<String> names = Sets.newTreeSet(String.CASE_INSENSITIVE_ORDER);
+ names.addAll(columnNames);
+ LineageInfo lineage = LineageInfoExtractor.extractLineageInfo(plan);
+ for (SetMultimap<?, Expression> byType :
lineage.getDirectLineageMap().values()) {
+ if (reachesAnyColumn(byType.values(), names, baseTableInfo)) {
+ return true;
+ }
+ }
+ // The dataset predicates once, not once per output column: the
per-output copy of them the lineage
+ // also offers holds the same expressions for every column the query
produces, and scanning it would
+ // visit each of them once per column.
+ if (reachesAnyColumn(lineage.getDatasetIndirectLineageMap().values(),
names, baseTableInfo)) {
+ return true;
+ }
+ if (reachesAnyColumnOfASubquery(plan, names, baseTableInfo)) {
+ return true;
+ }
+ return reachesAnyColumnAcrossScopes(plan, lineage, names,
baseTableInfo);
+ }
+
+ /** Whether this slot is a column of this table, through whatever views
stand between the two. */
+ private static boolean isColumnOf(Slot slot, BaseTableInfo baseTableInfo) {
+ if (!(slot instanceof SlotReference)) {
+ return false;
+ }
+ return ((SlotReference) slot).getOriginalTable()
+ .map(table -> new BaseTableInfo(table).equals(baseTableInfo))
+ .orElse(false);
+ }
+
+ /**
+ * Whether a name is answered for inside a subquery, out of that
subquery's own output.
+ *
+ * <p>This is the one place a name can move without any column the view
produces depending on it: the
+ * projection of a subquery is internal, so what the name resolves to
there changes what the query
+ * returns -- a row, or none -- while every column of the view stays the
one it was. The lineage of the
+ * view's columns does not reach it, so the scope the subquery became is
read here, expression by
+ * expression, the way the lineage is read for the view's own.
+ */
+ private static boolean reachesAnyColumnOfASubquery(Plan plan, Set<String>
names,
+ BaseTableInfo baseTableInfo) {
+ for (LogicalApply<?, ?> apply :
plan.<LogicalApply>collectToList(LogicalApply.class::isInstance)) {
+ if (apply.right().anyMatch(node -> node instanceof Plan
Review Comment:
[P2] Exclude ignored EXISTS projections from this dependency check. For
`SELECT o.id FROM outer_t o WHERE EXISTS (SELECT spare FROM inner_t i WHERE
i.id=o.id)`, with `spare` initially only on `outer_t`, a light ADD of
`inner_t.spare` rebinds the nested unqualified SELECT expression. EXISTS still
tests only whether a matching `i.id` row exists, so MV rows do not change. This
scan nevertheless sees `i.spare` in the Apply right Project, invalidates the
MV, drops its rewrite snapshot, and forces a rebuild. Check subquery output
dependencies for IN/scalar Apply while retaining EXISTS predicates. This
differs from the existing IN-output thread because that output affects rows.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
