Ingo,
ALSO: Perhaps clarify what you mean by "unique"? Suppose an array has
[1, 2, 2, 3] as its contents. What would the desired result be? The
best approach to this will depend on what you mean by that.
Cheers,
Mike
On 8/3/21 8:38 AM, Dmitry Lychagin wrote:
Hi Ingo,
1) SQL++ supports positional variables in the FROM clause, as follows:
FROM dataset AS ds, ds.array_field AS elementVar AT posVar
(see https://asterixdb.apache.org/docs/0.9.7/SQLPP.html#prod178
<https://asterixdb.apache.org/docs/0.9.7/SQLPP.html#prod178> -- FromTerm)
or using UNNEST instead of “,”
FROM dataset AS ds UNNEST ds.array_field AS elementVar AT posVar
(see https://asterixdb.apache.org/docs/0.9.7/SQLPP.html#prod181
<https://asterixdb.apache.org/docs/0.9.7/SQLPP.html#prod181> –
UnnestClause)
Positional variable is bound to a position of an element inside an
array which is being unnested.
Here’s how your query could look like using these variables:
SELECT …
FROM base_table, base_table.array_field AS array_element1 AT pos1,
base_table.array_field AS array_element2 AT pos2
WHERE pos1 < pos2
2) As for window function calls. I can confirm that if there is no
ORDER BY sub-clause inside OVER clause then the order of the elements
processed by window functions (row_number(), rank(), etc) is not
guaranteed.
Thanks,
-- Dmitry
*From: *Müller Ingo <[email protected]>
*Reply-To: *"[email protected]" <[email protected]>
*Date: *Tuesday, August 3, 2021 at 1:39 AM
*To: *"[email protected]" <[email protected]>
*Subject: *Producing combinations of array elements in SQL++
*EXTERNAL EMAIL**: *Use caution when opening attachments or clicking
on links
Dear SQL++ experts,
I am working on an academic study [1] comparing the expressiveness of
various query languages for nested data in a high-energy physics use
case. Among other systems, I have implemented the queries of the use
case in SQL++ [2]. In general, SQL++ seems to be quite well suited for
those queries, but one frequent pattern seems to have only cumbersome
formulations.
In short, I am missing the functionality to produce (deterministic)
element identifiers for array elements. In BigQuery’s SQL dialect [3],
this can be done with “UNNEST(array_field) WITH OFFSET AS idx”. For
now, I am using a construct similar to this: “FROM (SELECT
array_field.*, row_number() OVER () AS idx FROM
base_table.array_field) AS array_element” (see full query here [4]). I
have two issues with this: First, it needs undebatably more characters
than the BigQuery version and it is arguably also more cumbersome.
Second, I don’t think that it is even correct since the element
numbers are not guaranteed to be deterministic (i.e., if I use that
construct in several places in the query, the same array element may
get different values for row_number()). The documentation on
row_number says “If the window order clause is omitted, the return
values may be unpredictable.“ However, introducing an order clause not
only makes the pattern even more cumbersome (the elements are objects
with at least four fields), it also does not guarantee a deterministic
order still. The documentation of the Window Order Clause says: “The
row_number() function returns a distinct number for each tuple. If
tuples are tied, the results may be unpredictable.” (To be fair, if
two array elements agree on all fields, I can probably treat them
interchangeably in my use case.)
With that introduction, two questions: (1) Can you confirm that there
is really no language construct better than what I currently use (such
as BigQuery’s “OFFSET”)? (2) Can you confirm that row_number() is
really undeterministic in the way I use it?
I need these element identifiers for producing combinations (in the
mathematical sense [5]) of the elements in an array field, but maybe
there is a better way. In the simple case of producing all (unique)
pairs of elements of a particular array, I use a construct like the
following:
FROM (SELECT array_field.*, row_number() OVER () AS idx FROM
base_table.array_field) AS array_element1,
(SELECT array_field.*, row_number() OVER () AS idx FROM
base_table. array_field) AS array_element2
WHERE
array_element1.idx < array_element2.idx
So a last question: (3) Can you think of a better way to compute
combinations?
Thanks a lot in advance and best regards,
Ingo
[1] Dan Graur, Ingo Müller, Ghislain Fourny, Gordon T. Watts, Mason
Proffitt, Gustavo Alonso. "Evaluating Query Languages and Systems for
High-Energy Physics Data." arXiv: 2104.12615 [cs.DB], 2021.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2104.12615 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2104.12615>
[2] https://github.com/RumbleDB/iris-hep-benchmark-sqlpp
<https://github.com/RumbleDB/iris-hep-benchmark-sqlpp>
[3]
https://cloud.google.com/bigquery/docs/reference/standard-sql/arrays#flattening_arrays
<https://cloud.google.com/bigquery/docs/reference/standard-sql/arrays#flattening_arrays>
[4]
https://github.com/RumbleDB/iris-hep-benchmark-sqlpp/blob/master/queries/query-5/query.sqlpp
<https://github.com/RumbleDB/iris-hep-benchmark-sqlpp/blob/master/queries/query-5/query.sqlpp>
[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combination
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combination>
