Move PartitionSearchMode into datafusion_physical_plan, rename to InputOrderMode
#8364
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
alamb
commented
Nov 29, 2023
| /// (The vector stores the index of `a` in the respective PARTITION BY expression.) | ||
| /// - A `PARTITION BY a, b` or a `PARTITION BY b, a` can use `Sorted` mode. | ||
| /// | ||
| /// ## Aggregations |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I thought making the GROUP BY correspondence made this example clearer, even though there is non trivial redundancy
| /// Note these are the same examples as above, but with `GROUP BY` instead of | ||
| /// `PARTITION BY` to make the examples easier to read. | ||
| #[derive(Debug, Clone, PartialEq)] | ||
| pub enum PartitionSearchMode { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would like to rename this to something related to ordering rather than Partitioning if possible. Maybe InputOrder or InputOrderMode 🤔
Maybe @ozankabak has some thoughts
alamb
changed the title
PartitionSearchMode into datafusion_physical_planPartitionSearchMode into datafusion_physical_plan, rename to InputOrderMode
alamb
changed the title
PartitionSearchMode into datafusion_physical_plan, rename to InputOrderModePartitionSearchMode into datafusion_physical_plan, rename to InputOrderMode
appletreeisyellow
pushed a commit
to appletreeisyellow/datafusion
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 15, 2023
…InputOrderMode` (apache#8364) * Move PartitionSearchMode into datafusion_physical_plan * Improve comments * Rename to InputOrderMode * Update prost
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Which issue does this PR close?
N/A
Rationale for this change
It has bothered since it was introduced in #8006 that the AggregateExec uses something from the window exec module
What is really happening is that they both are being told how the input is ordered relative to important columns (e.g. partitioning or grouping).
For example, the
ordering_modein this output:Is actually the result of the
PartitionSearchModeWhat changes are included in this PR?
PartitionSearchModeinto its own moduleInputOrderModeI would also like to propose renaming the structure to something that doesn't have the word Partitioning in it(Update: renamed toInputOrderMode)Are these changes tested?
Are there any user-facing changes?
usepath forPartitionSearchMode