Jefffrey opened a new pull request, #4849:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/pull/4849

   # Which issue does this PR close?
   
   <!--
   We generally require a GitHub issue to be filed for all bug fixes and 
enhancements and this helps us generate change logs for our releases. You can 
link an issue to this PR using the GitHub syntax. For example `Closes #123` 
indicates that this PR will close issue #123.
   -->
   
   Closes #4667
   
   # Rationale for this change
   
   <!--
    Why are you proposing this change? If this is already explained clearly in 
the issue then this section is not needed.
    Explaining clearly why changes are proposed helps reviewers understand your 
changes and offer better suggestions for fixes.  
   -->
   
   During PushDownProjection optimization, it does not properly account for 
distinct, as it will attempt to push directly through the distinct, from input 
plan:
   
   ```sql
   Projection: data.id
     Distinct:
       Projection: data.id, data.data
         TableScan: data
   ```
   
   Will generate output plan:
   
   ```sql
   Projection: data.id
     Distinct:
       TableScan: data projection=[id]
   ```
   
   Where it has inadvertently removed the `data.data` projection during the 
push down and hence leading to incorrect distinct behaviour.
   
   # What changes are included in this PR?
   
   <!--
   There is no need to duplicate the description in the issue here but it is 
sometimes worth providing a summary of the individual changes in this PR.
   -->
   
   Properly handle distincts during recursion in PushDownProjection, to 
'restart' the traversal with all required columns (derived from schema of the 
distinct) rather than using the input required columns.
   
   After fix, the above plan output will instead be:
   
   ```sql
   Projection: data.id
     Distinct:
       TableScan: data projection=[id, data]
   ```
   
   # Are these changes tested?
   
   <!--
   We typically require tests for all PRs in order to:
   1. Prevent the code from being accidentally broken by subsequent changes
   2. Serve as another way to document the expected behavior of the code
   
   If tests are not included in your PR, please explain why (for example, are 
they covered by existing tests)?
   -->
   
   New unit test in push_down_projection
   
   # Are there any user-facing changes?
   
   <!--
   If there are user-facing changes then we may require documentation to be 
updated before approving the PR.
   -->
   
   <!--
   If there are any breaking changes to public APIs, please add the `api 
change` label.
   -->


-- 
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]

Reply via email to