rdblue commented on a change in pull request #3764:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/3764#discussion_r772002405
##########
File path:
spark/v3.2/spark-extensions/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/execution/dynamicpruning/RowLevelCommandDynamicPruning.scala
##########
@@ -86,6 +89,16 @@ case class RowLevelCommandDynamicPruning(spark:
SparkSession) extends Rule[Logic
val matchingRowsPlan = command match {
case d: DeleteFromIcebergTable =>
Filter(d.condition.get, relation)
+ case u: UpdateIcebergTable =>
+ // UPDATEs with subqueries may be rewritten using a UNION with two
identical scan relations
+ // each scan relation will get its own dynamic filter that will be
shared during execution
+ // the analyzer will assign different expr IDs for each scan relation
output attributes
+ // that's why the condition may refer to invalid attr expr IDs and
must be transformed
Review comment:
Okay, after reading through all the cases for rewriting update, this
makes a lot more sense. I think it would have helped me reading through this to
either direct to the union case in `RewriteUpdateTable` or to explain the
rewrite here and give a little more context on when there will be a union.
As for my other comments, I think it would still be good to rename `attrMap`
and I'm not sure whether there could be a case where `u.table.output` doesn't
match `relation.output`.
--
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]
