Skip to content
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

Separate NonEquiJoinOperator from HashJoinOperator #14942

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

Jackie-Jiang
Copy link
Contributor

Close #9728

Currently non-equi join is also executed with HashJoinOperator which is very inefficient because we can short-circuit a lot of places as there is no join key.
This PR extracts the common join logic into BaseJoinOperator, and adds a NonEquiJoinOperator to process join without key.

@Jackie-Jiang Jackie-Jiang added performance refactor multi-stage Related to the multi-stage query engine labels Jan 30, 2025
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Jan 30, 2025

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 74.52830% with 54 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 63.69%. Comparing base (59551e4) to head (0a42cca).
Report is 1647 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
...ot/query/runtime/operator/NonEquiJoinOperator.java 49.25% 25 Missing and 9 partials ⚠️
...pinot/query/runtime/operator/BaseJoinOperator.java 85.38% 6 Missing and 13 partials ⚠️
...pinot/query/runtime/operator/HashJoinOperator.java 91.66% 0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master   #14942      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     61.75%   63.69%   +1.94%     
- Complexity      207     1472    +1265     
============================================
  Files          2436     2712     +276     
  Lines        133233   151990   +18757     
  Branches      20636    23481    +2845     
============================================
+ Hits          82274    96807   +14533     
- Misses        44911    47897    +2986     
- Partials       6048     7286    +1238     
Flag Coverage Δ
custom-integration1 100.00% <ø> (+99.99%) ⬆️
integration 100.00% <ø> (+99.99%) ⬆️
integration1 100.00% <ø> (+99.99%) ⬆️
integration2 0.00% <ø> (ø)
java-11 63.67% <74.52%> (+1.96%) ⬆️
java-21 63.57% <74.52%> (+1.94%) ⬆️
skip-bytebuffers-false 63.68% <74.52%> (+1.94%) ⬆️
skip-bytebuffers-true 63.55% <74.52%> (+35.82%) ⬆️
temurin 63.69% <74.52%> (+1.94%) ⬆️
unittests 63.68% <74.52%> (+1.94%) ⬆️
unittests1 56.20% <74.52%> (+9.31%) ⬆️
unittests2 34.02% <0.00%> (+6.29%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
multi-stage Related to the multi-stage query engine performance refactor
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[multi-stage] [optimization] Move inequi join out of hashjoin when there is no join key
2 participants