c21 commented on a change in pull request #35574:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/35574#discussion_r810430003
##########
File path:
sql/core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/execution/exchange/EnsureRequirements.scala
##########
@@ -56,7 +57,23 @@ case class EnsureRequirements(
// Ensure that the operator's children satisfy their output distribution
requirements.
var children = originalChildren.zip(requiredChildDistributions).map {
case (child, distribution) if
child.outputPartitioning.satisfies(distribution) =>
- child
+ (child.outputPartitioning, distribution) match {
+ case (p: HashPartitioning, d: ClusteredDistribution) =>
+ if
(conf.getConf(SQLConf.REQUIRE_ALL_CLUSTER_KEYS_FOR_SOLE_PARTITION) &&
+ requiredChildDistributions.size == 1 &&
!p.isPartitionedOnFullKeys(d)) {
+ // Add an extra shuffle for `ClusteredDistribution` even though
its child
Review comment:
> because there're other existing call sites of satisfies and might be
more future call sites such that we don't want to replicate special the logic
there, e.g.,
https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/sql/core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/sql/execution/exchange/ValidateRequirements.scala#L34-L50
This is a good point, thanks for pointing it out @sigmod. I am changing the
approach to rewrite logic inside `HashPartitioning.satisfies0`, also suggested
by https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/35552#issuecomment-1045438357 from
@sunchao .
--
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]
