-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Update the CONCAT scalar function to support Utf8View #12224
Update the CONCAT scalar function to support Utf8View #12224
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Devan <devandbenz@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Devan <devandbenz@gmail.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
one minor comment regarding LargeUtf8
, but overall LGTM
@@ -46,7 +45,7 @@ impl ConcatFunc { | |||
pub fn new() -> Self { | |||
use DataType::*; | |||
Self { | |||
signature: Signature::variadic(vec![Utf8], Volatility::Immutable), | |||
signature: Signature::variadic(vec![Utf8, Utf8View], Volatility::Immutable), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Perhaps as a follow on PR we can expand this to also support LargeUtf8
s... though it looks like maybe they are from the tests? Does this just need to be updated and it'll work?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think it's casting to Utf8 from LargeUtf8? Not sure. I can follow up and modify this code to include that though it should be relatively quick.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/12224/files#diff-71970189679c6dd5b3b677bb21603234b488e68d1601be9c4d400d40e430a909R70 pretty sure this line captures the LargeUtf8 usage at the moment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sorry, should've been clearer, to your point, I think it works but causes a cast to utf8.
> CREATE TABLE ttt AS SELECT arrow_cast('T', 'LargeUtf8') AS a;
0 row(s) fetched.
Elapsed 0.012 seconds.
> SELECt ttt.a FROM ttt;
+---+
| a |
+---+
| T |
+---+
1 row(s) fetched.
Elapsed 0.007 seconds.
> EXPLAIN SELECt ttt.a FROM ttt;
+---------------+-----------------------------------------------+
| plan_type | plan |
+---------------+-----------------------------------------------+
| logical_plan | TableScan: ttt projection=[a] |
| physical_plan | MemoryExec: partitions=1, partition_sizes=[1] |
| | |
+---------------+-----------------------------------------------+
2 row(s) fetched.
Elapsed 0.007 seconds.
> EXPLAIN SELECt concat(ttt.a, ttt.a) FROM ttt;
+---------------+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| plan_type | plan |
+---------------+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| logical_plan | Projection: concat(__common_expr_1 AS ttt.a, __common_expr_1 AS ttt.a) |
| | Projection: CAST(ttt.a AS Utf8) AS __common_expr_1 |
| | TableScan: ttt projection=[a] |
| physical_plan | ProjectionExec: expr=[concat(__common_expr_1@0, __common_expr_1@0) as concat(ttt.a,ttt.a)] |
| | ProjectionExec: expr=[CAST(a@0 AS Utf8) as __common_expr_1] |
| | MemoryExec: partitions=1, partition_sizes=[1] |
| | |
+---------------+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
I think if you were to concat two largeutf8s together, you should get that same type as the return?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Correct - I will need to modify the input/return values for this. I'll add an additional test for LargeUtf8 and fix in this PR tonight. It shouldn't take long, I think I have a path forward to change that and it should be relatively painless.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Correction** I fixed it now it was really quick resolution lol
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
> SELECT ttt.a from ttt;
+---+
| a |
+---+
| T |
+---+
1 row(s) fetched.
Elapsed 0.009 seconds.
> EXPLAIN SELECT ttt.a from ttt;
+---------------+-----------------------------------------------+
| plan_type | plan |
+---------------+-----------------------------------------------+
| logical_plan | TableScan: ttt projection=[a] |
| physical_plan | MemoryExec: partitions=1, partition_sizes=[1] |
| | |
+---------------+-----------------------------------------------+
2 row(s) fetched.
Elapsed 0.007 seconds.
> EXPLAIN SELECT concat(ttt.a, ttt.a) from ttt;
+---------------+----------------------------------------------------------------+
| plan_type | plan |
+---------------+----------------------------------------------------------------+
| logical_plan | Projection: concat(ttt.a, ttt.a) |
| | TableScan: ttt projection=[a] |
| physical_plan | ProjectionExec: expr=[concat(a@0, a@0) as concat(ttt.a,ttt.a)] |
| | MemoryExec: partitions=1, partition_sizes=[1] |
| | |
+---------------+----------------------------------------------------------------+
2 row(s) fetched.
Elapsed 0.009 seconds.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actually it's erroring on cast to generic string array. I need to modify 😆 whoops still not fixed
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's resolved 👍
@@ -776,7 +776,7 @@ EXPLAIN SELECT | |||
FROM test; | |||
---- | |||
logical_plan | |||
01)Projection: concat(CAST(test.column1_utf8view AS Utf8), CAST(test.column2_utf8view AS Utf8)) AS c | |||
01)Projection: concat(test.column1_utf8view, test.column2_utf8view) AS c |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
💪
Ok(match &arg_types[0] { | ||
Utf8View => Utf8View, | ||
LargeUtf8 => LargeUtf8, | ||
_ => Utf8, | ||
}) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
the logic seems to assume all arguments are of the same type?
also, why not always return Utf8
?
the code performing actual concatenation seems to be always the same.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ah yeah @findepi I think the logic is "Whatever the first argument type is the output should be of that type" so if the received values were: Utf8, Utf8View the output would be Utf8. I'm taking the logic from other UDFs and applying it here. It may not be the best way of doing this though.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think the logic is "Whatever the first argument type is the output should be of that type
i understand this is what's implemented. but not sure why it is so.
what's the exact benefit of presenting the data as string view, if we computed the exact string anyway, and we technically don't need to represent it as a string view?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ah okay. So what you're saying is that here: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/12224/files#diff-71970189679c6dd5b3b677bb21603234b488e68d1601be9c4d400d40e430a909R204 I'm building a Utf8 string anyways?
So I suspect I should change that bit of code to use a StringViewArrayBuilder?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yes, that's my intuition
except that i would keep building StringArray and just declare return type as Utf8 always
from the issue #11836
Currently, a call to CONCAT with a Utf8View datatypes induces a cast. After the change that fixes this issue, it should not.
this is about inputs to the function, not the return type
Side note:
String view could be an interesting return type if we wanted to optimize for single non-null string view input and let it pass-through; but the code doesn't do this today, not sure it's worth implementing for this edge case and it should be independent of arguments order, ie not tied to the first input's type.
end of side note.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@findepi what about for LargeUtf8? I suspect that if a LargeUtf8 is the input then the output should also be that since its an i64 datatype vs the i32 datatype for Utf8?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
i don't know the exact rules for how we handle LargeUtf8.
i focused on the string view portion of the PR. from "string views perspective", LargeUtf8 is non-issue, so IMO it's fine not to change the return type with respect to LargeUtf8 in this PR. but i agree that we probably should return LargeUtf8 when any input is LargeUtf8 (pr what exactly the logic should be).
in fact, what does the binary concat operator do?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@findepi when you say binary concat operator are you talking about ||
as an operator?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
when you say binary concat operator are you talking about
||
as an operator?
yes
the logic seems to assume all arguments are of the same type?
also, why not always return
Utf8
? the code performing actual concatenation seems to be always the same.
the question still holds (why exactly we bias towards the first param type), but i am no longer convinced about my suggestion to use Utf8 always.
i think we should "just" make sure concat(a, b, c)
is type-equivalent to a || b || c
.
the ||
's logic apparently is
- if any of the operands are Utf8View, the result is Utf8View
- else, if any of the operands are LargeUtf8, the result is LargeUtf8
cc @alamb
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sounds good @findepi i like that logic. I can adjust to make it so.
Signed-off-by: Devan <devandbenz@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Devan <devandbenz@gmail.com>
@@ -418,6 +451,88 @@ impl StringArrayBuilder { | |||
} | |||
} | |||
|
|||
pub(crate) struct LargeStringArrayBuilder { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I wanted to make the already existing StringArrayBuilder
generic but was having issues 😢
Ok(match &arg_types[0] { | ||
LargeUtf8 => LargeUtf8, | ||
_ => Utf8, | ||
}) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
currently Utf8View isn't declared as an expected return type,
but the code does return Utf8View values.
should anything be failing when the runtime value type doesn't match the declared return type?
(if so, what would be a test case exercising such case?)
cc @comphead
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I've added test cases for Utf8View and LargeUtf8 return types. Have gone ahead and adjusted this.
Signed-off-by: Devan <devandbenz@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Devan <devandbenz@gmail.com>
block: String | ||
} | ||
|
||
impl StringViewArrayBuilder { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
StringViewArrayBuilder
works but it almost feels "hacky"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think the original intent of StringViewBuilder
when @JasonLi-cn added it was to have a way to append (but not complete) strings to avoid a copy and not incrementally update the null mask.
Specifically, StringBuilder in arrow https://docs.rs/arrow/latest/arrow/array/type.StringBuilder.html#method.append_value lets you append an entire string but it requires the input be contiguous bytes
StringArrayBuilder
is that you can push bytes (via write
) wthout copying the data.
The reason I think it feels hacky is that the API for building up single values in a StringArray or StringViewArray without a copy is not present
As we see we want to do the same thing with Utf8View
I wonder if we should spend some time making the API eaiser to use 🤔
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I filed apache/arrow-rs#6347 to discuss adding an API like this in arrow as well
Signed-off-by: Devan <devandbenz@gmail.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thank you @devanbenz @findepi and @tshauck
I think this PR is good enough to merge, but I agree with @devanbenz 's observation https://github.com/apache/datafusion/pull/12224/files#r1740156822 that StringViewArrayBuilder feels hacky.
Specifically I think what is happening is that StringArrayBuilder
is for a pretty specialized usecase, and thus so is StringViewArrayBuilder
I filed apache/arrow-rs#6347 upstream with a description of the use case to see if we can come up with something more general
if data_type == &Utf8View { | ||
dt = data_type; | ||
} | ||
if data_type == &LargeUtf8 && dt != &Utf8View { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
👍
block: String | ||
} | ||
|
||
impl StringViewArrayBuilder { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think the original intent of StringViewBuilder
when @JasonLi-cn added it was to have a way to append (but not complete) strings to avoid a copy and not incrementally update the null mask.
Specifically, StringBuilder in arrow https://docs.rs/arrow/latest/arrow/array/type.StringBuilder.html#method.append_value lets you append an entire string but it requires the input be contiguous bytes
StringArrayBuilder
is that you can push bytes (via write
) wthout copying the data.
The reason I think it feels hacky is that the API for building up single values in a StringArray or StringViewArray without a copy is not present
As we see we want to do the same thing with Utf8View
I wonder if we should spend some time making the API eaiser to use 🤔
block: String | ||
} | ||
|
||
impl StringViewArrayBuilder { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I filed apache/arrow-rs#6347 to discuss adding an API like this in arrow as well
Great, sounds good @alamb 🙏 |
Thanks again @devanbenz |
Which issue does this PR close?
Closes #11836
Rationale for this change
Explained within ticket #11836
What changes are included in this PR?
Are these changes tested?
Are there any user-facing changes?