ygf11 opened a new pull request, #5156:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow-datafusion/pull/5156
# 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 #5022.
# 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.
-->
For the nested loop join, the algorithm will be like:
```
for out-row in outer-table
for inner-row in inner-table
check-join
```
We can see, the inner table will be visited many time.
In the current implemetion of `NestedLoopJoin`, the relationship between
`inner/outer table` and `left/right table` is not fixed, it is decided by the
required distribution:
* For (UnspecifiedDistribution, SinglePartition), right is the inner table
side.
* For (SinglePartition, UnspecifiedDistribution), left table is the inner
table side.
If the table is the inner side, we should add `OnceFut` for it. There are
two reasons:
* It is better to cache the result of a physical plan that has to be
executed many times.
* Some physical plan can not be executed many time, like `RepartitionExec`.
The `NestedLoopJoinExec` always add `OnceFut` for the left table now, it is
not correct, some queries(#5022) will panic.
# What changes are included in this PR?
1. Add `OnceFut` for the inner table side of nested loop join.
3. Remove redundant usage of `bitmap`, Left/LeftAnti/LeftSemi does not need
the bitmap.
<!--
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.
-->
# 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
4. 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)?
-->
# 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]
