zhidongqu-db opened a new pull request, #56052:
URL: https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/56052

   …e synthetic join
   
   ### What changes were proposed in this pull request?
   
   This PR changes `RewriteNearestByJoin` to construct its synthetic cross-join 
with the user's `joinType` (`Inner` or `LeftOuter`) instead of always using 
`LeftOuter`. The `Generate` operator's `outer` flag continues to be derived 
from `joinType == LeftOuter`, so the externally observable semantics are 
unchanged.
   
   ### Why are the changes needed?
   
   The original implementation hardcoded the synthetic join to `LeftOuter` and 
justified it on the grounds that `LEFT OUTER` and `INNER` are equivalent for an 
unconditioned join when the right side is non-empty, and `Generate(outer = 
false)` would drop unwanted rows for `INNER` when right is empty.
   
   That reasoning holds for correctness but has a major performance cost:
   
   - **`INNER NEAREST BY` cannot be planned as a Cartesian product.** Spark's 
strategy picks `CartesianProductExec` only for `Inner` joins with no condition; 
an unconditioned `LeftOuter` join falls back to `BroadcastNestedLoopJoin`, 
which tries to broadcast the right side. When the right relation is large, the 
broadcast either OOMs or exceeds `spark.sql.autoBroadcastJoinThreshold` and the 
planner is left with no good option. `CartesianProductExec` partitions both 
sides and streams pairs, so it scales naturally with right-side size. 
Respecting the user's `INNER` join type re-enables this strategy for the common 
`INNER NEAREST BY` case.
   - It also makes the EXPLAIN output misleading (shows `LeftOuter` even though 
the user wrote `INNER`).
   - For `INNER` with an empty right side, the old plan generates one row per 
left input and then filters them away via `Generate(outer = false)` and the 
`size(matches) > 0` filter -- extra work that respecting `joinType` avoids at 
the source.
   
   ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
   
   No change in query results. `EXPLAIN` output for `INNER NEAREST BY` queries 
now shows `Inner` rather than `LeftOuter` for the synthetic join node, and the 
physical plan for such queries can now use `CartesianProductExec` instead of 
`BroadcastNestedLoopJoin` when the right relation is too large to broadcast.
   
   ### How was this patch tested?
   
   - `RewriteNearestByJoinSuite`: `expectedRewrite` now takes a `joinType: 
JoinType` and the existing tests (similarity/distance x inner/leftouter, EXACT, 
boundary k, self-join, nondeterministic ranking) assert the synthetic join 
matches the user's join type.
   - Golden file `sql-tests/results/join-nearest-by.sql.out`
   
   ### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
   
   Coauthored-by: Claude Code (Opus 4.7), human-reviewed and tested
   
   Closes #56023 from zhidongqu-db/respect-nn-join-type.
   
   Authored-by: Zero Qu <[email protected]>
   
   <!--
   Thanks for sending a pull request!  Here are some tips for you:
     1. If this is your first time, please read our contributor guidelines: 
https://spark.apache.org/contributing.html
     2. Ensure you have added or run the appropriate tests for your PR: 
https://spark.apache.org/developer-tools.html
     3. If the PR is unfinished, add '[WIP]' in your PR title, e.g., 
'[WIP][SPARK-XXXX] Your PR title ...'.
     4. Be sure to keep the PR description updated to reflect all changes.
     5. Please write your PR title to summarize what this PR proposes.
     6. If possible, provide a concise example to reproduce the issue for a 
faster review.
     7. If you want to add a new configuration, please read the guideline first 
for naming configurations in
        
'core/src/main/scala/org/apache/spark/internal/config/ConfigEntry.scala'.
     8. If you want to add or modify an error type or message, please read the 
guideline first in
        'common/utils/src/main/resources/error/README.md'.
   -->
   
   ### What changes were proposed in this pull request?
   <!--
   Please clarify what changes you are proposing. The purpose of this section 
is to outline the changes and how this PR fixes the issue. 
   If possible, please consider writing useful notes for better and faster 
reviews in your PR. See the examples below.
     1. If you refactor some codes with changing classes, showing the class 
hierarchy will help reviewers.
     2. If you fix some SQL features, you can provide some references of other 
DBMSes.
     3. If there is design documentation, please add the link.
     4. If there is a discussion in the mailing list, please add the link.
   -->
   
   
   ### Why are the changes needed?
   <!--
   Please clarify why the changes are needed. For instance,
     1. If you propose a new API, clarify the use case for a new API.
     2. If you fix a bug, you can clarify why it is a bug.
   -->
   
   
   ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change?
   <!--
   Note that it means *any* user-facing change including all aspects such as 
new features, bug fixes, or other behavior changes. Documentation-only updates 
are not considered user-facing changes.
   
   If yes, please clarify the previous behavior and the change this PR proposes 
- provide the console output, description and/or an example to show the 
behavior difference if possible.
   If possible, please also clarify if this is a user-facing change compared to 
the released Spark versions or within the unreleased branches such as master.
   If no, write 'No'.
   -->
   
   
   ### How was this patch tested?
   <!--
   If tests were added, say they were added here. Please make sure to add some 
test cases that check the changes thoroughly including negative and positive 
cases if possible.
   If it was tested in a way different from regular unit tests, please clarify 
how you tested step by step, ideally copy and paste-able, so that other 
reviewers can test and check, and descendants can verify in the future.
   If tests were not added, please describe why they were not added and/or why 
it was difficult to add.
   If benchmark tests were added, please run the benchmarks in GitHub Actions 
for the consistent environment, and the instructions could accord to: 
https://spark.apache.org/developer-tools.html#github-workflow-benchmarks.
   -->
   
   
   ### Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
   <!--
   If generative AI tooling has been used in the process of authoring this 
patch, please include the
   phrase: 'Generated-by: ' followed by the name of the tool and its version.
   If no, write 'No'.
   Please refer to the [ASF Generative Tooling 
Guidance](https://www.apache.org/legal/generative-tooling.html) for details.
   -->
   


-- 
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]

Reply via email to