yujun777 commented on code in PR #68646:
URL: https://github.com/apache/doris/pull/68646#discussion_r4225807007


##########
fe/fe-core/src/main/java/org/apache/doris/mtmv/MTMVRelationManager.java:
##########
@@ -349,34 +361,237 @@ public void dropTable(Table table) {
         // because a dropped table is the one change whose query is gone 
beyond doubt. What the two record
         // is the same state either way. Unlike a rename it stays an 
invalidation: the table is gone for
         // good, so the state is not something a later alter can make obsolete.
-        processBaseTableChange(new BaseTableInfo(table), "The base table has 
been deleted:", false);
+        processBaseTableChange(new BaseTableInfo(table), "The base table has 
been deleted:", null);
     }
 
     /**
      * update mtmv status to `SCHEMA_CHANGE`.
      *
      * @param isReplace
+     * @param queryJudgedColumns the names the alter gives the table or takes 
away from it, which leave the
+     *                           judgement about each MV's state to that MV's 
own query, or null when the
+     *                           alter is not one a query decides. The names 
are carried rather than judged
+     *                           before the call because the judgement is 
about them; see
+     *                           {@code AlterOp#queryJudgedColumnNames} for 
which operations name one, and
+     *                           {@link #invalidateMvUnlessQueryHolds} for 
what is asked about it. A rename
+     *                           of the base table names no column: it is left 
to the record below, which
+     *                           says what the MV that keeps spelling the old 
name needs to hear
      */
     @Override
-    public void alterTable(BaseTableInfo oldTableInfo, Optional<BaseTableInfo> 
newTableInfo, boolean isReplace) {
+    public void alterTable(BaseTableInfo oldTableInfo, Optional<BaseTableInfo> 
newTableInfo, boolean isReplace,
+            QueryJudgedChange queryJudgedChange) {
         // when replace, need deal two table
         if (isReplace) {
             // REPLACE TABLE already invalidates the IVM baseline explicitly, 
see Alter#processReplaceTable
-            processBaseTableChange(newTableInfo.get(), "The base table has 
been updated:", false);
+            processBaseTableChange(newTableInfo.get(), "The base table has 
been updated:", null);
         }
-        boolean renamed = !isReplace && newTableInfo.isPresent()
-                && !Objects.equals(oldTableInfo.getTableName(), 
newTableInfo.get().getTableName());
-        // A rename is the one change whose query check is skipped: the MV 
query keeps spelling the old
-        // name, so it is unanalyzable by construction, and the reason it 
would be invalidated with --
-        // "the query is no longer analyzable" -- says less than the message 
this call records anyway.
-        boolean checkQueryUsable = !renamed;
-        processBaseTableChange(oldTableInfo, "The base table has been 
updated:", checkQueryUsable);
+        processBaseTableChange(oldTableInfo, "The base table has been 
updated:", queryJudgedChange);
     }
 
 
     /**
-     * An MV's query is only as good as the base table schema it was analyzed 
against. Re-analyzing the
-     * MV query here (right after the alter was applied) is what detects a 
changed column identity:
+     * Whether the query, as it is analysed now, reads a column of any of 
these names, and reads it where
+     * the change can reach it.
+     *
+     * <p>There are two places a name is the change's to answer for. One is a 
column of the table the change
+     * is about: that is the column this view's rows were computed from, and 
the names are matched
+     * case-insensitively because a name is what moves. The other is a column 
the query reaches across a
+     * scope boundary -- the plan records those on the Apply that stands for 
the subquery, whose correlation
+     * slots are the outer columns its right side reads -- because such a name 
is the scopes' to answer for
+     * rather than the query's: the nearest column to the reference answers 
for it, so a column the change
+     * takes away from a scope inside leaves the name to one outside, and a 
column it gives to a scope inside
+     * takes the name over. A name reached with the qualifier of another table 
inside the query's own scope
+     * is neither: no later change can move it, so one to a column it does not 
name is one this view's rows
+     * do not depend on.
+     */
+    private static boolean reachesAnyColumnOf(Plan plan, BaseTableInfo 
baseTableInfo, Set<String> columnNames) {
+        if (plan == null) {
+            // A query whose plan was not kept is one this cannot be answered 
about, and "it does" is the
+            // answer that keeps the view safe.
+            return true;
+        }
+        Set<String> names = Sets.newTreeSet(String.CASE_INSENSITIVE_ORDER);
+        names.addAll(columnNames);
+        LineageInfo lineage = LineageInfoExtractor.extractLineageInfo(plan);
+        for (SetMultimap<?, Expression> byType : 
lineage.getDirectLineageMap().values()) {
+            if (reachesAnyColumn(byType.values(), names, baseTableInfo)) {
+                return true;
+            }
+        }
+        // The dataset predicates once, not once per output column: the 
per-output copy of them the lineage
+        // also offers holds the same expressions for every column the query 
produces, and scanning it would
+        // visit each of them once per column.
+        if (reachesAnyColumn(lineage.getDatasetIndirectLineageMap().values(), 
names, baseTableInfo)) {
+            return true;
+        }
+        if (reachesAnyColumnOfASubquery(plan, names, baseTableInfo)) {
+            return true;
+        }
+        return reachesAnyColumnAcrossScopes(plan, lineage, names, 
baseTableInfo);
+    }
+
+    /** Whether this slot is a column of this table, through whatever views 
stand between the two. */
+    private static boolean isColumnOf(Slot slot, BaseTableInfo baseTableInfo) {
+        if (!(slot instanceof SlotReference)) {
+            return false;
+        }
+        return ((SlotReference) slot).getOriginalTable()
+                .map(table -> new BaseTableInfo(table).equals(baseTableInfo))
+                .orElse(false);
+    }
+
+    /**
+     * Whether a name the change is about is answered for inside a subquery, 
out of that subquery's own
+     * scope.
+     *
+     * <p>This is the one place a name can move without any column the view 
produces depending on it: the
+     * scope of a subquery is internal, so which column answers for a name 
there changes what the query
+     * returns -- a row, or none -- while every column of the view stays the 
one it was. The lineage of the
+     * view's columns does not reach it, so the scope the subquery became is 
read here, expression by
+     * expression, the way the lineage is read for the view's own.
+     *
+     * <p>Two things are read. One is a value the subquery itself names -- an 
expression of its own under one
+     * of these names, rather than a column of a table -- because that is what 
a name the change takes away
+     * falls back to, and it decides the rows whether the subquery is a 
predicate or a value. It is read only
+     * where the table the change is about is one that subquery reads: what a 
name falls back to is what the
+     * scope that answered for it holds, so a scope that does not read the 
table holds nothing for the name
+     * and one of its own is one the change never reached. The other is a 
column of the table the change is
+     * about, which decides the rows only when the subquery's output is one 
the query reads: an EXISTS tests
+     * the rows of its subquery and not what it projects, so a name it 
projects and never compares is one
+     * this view's rows do not depend on.
+     *
+     * <p>Each scope is read on its own. A subquery inside one of these is a 
scope of its own, and it is
+     * judged where it is read and not as a part of its enclosing one: its 
projection is held only where
+     * that scope's own output is read, so an EXISTS inside an IN is still not 
compared by the IN.
+     */
+    private static boolean reachesAnyColumnOfASubquery(Plan plan, Set<String> 
names,
+            BaseTableInfo baseTableInfo) {
+        for (LogicalApply<?, ?> apply : 
plan.<LogicalApply>collectToList(LogicalApply.class::isInstance)) {
+            List<Plan> itsOwnScope = ownScopeOf(apply);
+            boolean outputDecidesRows = !apply.isExist();
+            boolean isOneOfItsTables = readsAnyTableOf(itsOwnScope, 
baseTableInfo);

Review Comment:
   Confirmed as over-invalidation, and not fixed here -- and it is the same fix 
as the CTE thread above rather than a second one. Measured: `ADD COLUMN c.flag 
DEFAULT 0` invalidates the view and drops its rewrite snapshot, while the CTE 
is never consumed, the live `flag` is still the constant alias, and every row 
of the query is the same.
   
   What reads the changed table here is the unused producer inside the Apply's 
own scope, and restricting that read to the part of the plan the result reaches 
is the walk from the result the CTE thread calls for. One change closes both 
shapes.
   



##########
fe/fe-core/src/main/java/org/apache/doris/mtmv/MTMVRelationManager.java:
##########
@@ -349,34 +361,237 @@ public void dropTable(Table table) {
         // because a dropped table is the one change whose query is gone 
beyond doubt. What the two record
         // is the same state either way. Unlike a rename it stays an 
invalidation: the table is gone for
         // good, so the state is not something a later alter can make obsolete.
-        processBaseTableChange(new BaseTableInfo(table), "The base table has 
been deleted:", false);
+        processBaseTableChange(new BaseTableInfo(table), "The base table has 
been deleted:", null);
     }
 
     /**
      * update mtmv status to `SCHEMA_CHANGE`.
      *
      * @param isReplace
+     * @param queryJudgedColumns the names the alter gives the table or takes 
away from it, which leave the
+     *                           judgement about each MV's state to that MV's 
own query, or null when the
+     *                           alter is not one a query decides. The names 
are carried rather than judged
+     *                           before the call because the judgement is 
about them; see
+     *                           {@code AlterOp#queryJudgedColumnNames} for 
which operations name one, and
+     *                           {@link #invalidateMvUnlessQueryHolds} for 
what is asked about it. A rename
+     *                           of the base table names no column: it is left 
to the record below, which
+     *                           says what the MV that keeps spelling the old 
name needs to hear
      */
     @Override
-    public void alterTable(BaseTableInfo oldTableInfo, Optional<BaseTableInfo> 
newTableInfo, boolean isReplace) {
+    public void alterTable(BaseTableInfo oldTableInfo, Optional<BaseTableInfo> 
newTableInfo, boolean isReplace,
+            QueryJudgedChange queryJudgedChange) {
         // when replace, need deal two table
         if (isReplace) {
             // REPLACE TABLE already invalidates the IVM baseline explicitly, 
see Alter#processReplaceTable
-            processBaseTableChange(newTableInfo.get(), "The base table has 
been updated:", false);
+            processBaseTableChange(newTableInfo.get(), "The base table has 
been updated:", null);
         }
-        boolean renamed = !isReplace && newTableInfo.isPresent()
-                && !Objects.equals(oldTableInfo.getTableName(), 
newTableInfo.get().getTableName());
-        // A rename is the one change whose query check is skipped: the MV 
query keeps spelling the old
-        // name, so it is unanalyzable by construction, and the reason it 
would be invalidated with --
-        // "the query is no longer analyzable" -- says less than the message 
this call records anyway.
-        boolean checkQueryUsable = !renamed;
-        processBaseTableChange(oldTableInfo, "The base table has been 
updated:", checkQueryUsable);
+        processBaseTableChange(oldTableInfo, "The base table has been 
updated:", queryJudgedChange);
     }
 
 
     /**
-     * An MV's query is only as good as the base table schema it was analyzed 
against. Re-analyzing the
-     * MV query here (right after the alter was applied) is what detects a 
changed column identity:
+     * Whether the query, as it is analysed now, reads a column of any of 
these names, and reads it where
+     * the change can reach it.
+     *
+     * <p>There are two places a name is the change's to answer for. One is a 
column of the table the change
+     * is about: that is the column this view's rows were computed from, and 
the names are matched
+     * case-insensitively because a name is what moves. The other is a column 
the query reaches across a
+     * scope boundary -- the plan records those on the Apply that stands for 
the subquery, whose correlation
+     * slots are the outer columns its right side reads -- because such a name 
is the scopes' to answer for
+     * rather than the query's: the nearest column to the reference answers 
for it, so a column the change
+     * takes away from a scope inside leaves the name to one outside, and a 
column it gives to a scope inside
+     * takes the name over. A name reached with the qualifier of another table 
inside the query's own scope
+     * is neither: no later change can move it, so one to a column it does not 
name is one this view's rows
+     * do not depend on.
+     */
+    private static boolean reachesAnyColumnOf(Plan plan, BaseTableInfo 
baseTableInfo, Set<String> columnNames) {
+        if (plan == null) {
+            // A query whose plan was not kept is one this cannot be answered 
about, and "it does" is the
+            // answer that keeps the view safe.
+            return true;
+        }
+        Set<String> names = Sets.newTreeSet(String.CASE_INSENSITIVE_ORDER);
+        names.addAll(columnNames);
+        LineageInfo lineage = LineageInfoExtractor.extractLineageInfo(plan);
+        for (SetMultimap<?, Expression> byType : 
lineage.getDirectLineageMap().values()) {
+            if (reachesAnyColumn(byType.values(), names, baseTableInfo)) {
+                return true;
+            }
+        }
+        // The dataset predicates once, not once per output column: the 
per-output copy of them the lineage
+        // also offers holds the same expressions for every column the query 
produces, and scanning it would
+        // visit each of them once per column.
+        if (reachesAnyColumn(lineage.getDatasetIndirectLineageMap().values(), 
names, baseTableInfo)) {
+            return true;
+        }
+        if (reachesAnyColumnOfASubquery(plan, names, baseTableInfo)) {
+            return true;
+        }
+        return reachesAnyColumnAcrossScopes(plan, lineage, names, 
baseTableInfo);
+    }
+
+    /** Whether this slot is a column of this table, through whatever views 
stand between the two. */
+    private static boolean isColumnOf(Slot slot, BaseTableInfo baseTableInfo) {
+        if (!(slot instanceof SlotReference)) {
+            return false;
+        }
+        return ((SlotReference) slot).getOriginalTable()
+                .map(table -> new BaseTableInfo(table).equals(baseTableInfo))
+                .orElse(false);
+    }
+
+    /**
+     * Whether a name the change is about is answered for inside a subquery, 
out of that subquery's own
+     * scope.
+     *
+     * <p>This is the one place a name can move without any column the view 
produces depending on it: the
+     * scope of a subquery is internal, so which column answers for a name 
there changes what the query
+     * returns -- a row, or none -- while every column of the view stays the 
one it was. The lineage of the
+     * view's columns does not reach it, so the scope the subquery became is 
read here, expression by
+     * expression, the way the lineage is read for the view's own.
+     *
+     * <p>Two things are read. One is a value the subquery itself names -- an 
expression of its own under one
+     * of these names, rather than a column of a table -- because that is what 
a name the change takes away
+     * falls back to, and it decides the rows whether the subquery is a 
predicate or a value. It is read only
+     * where the table the change is about is one that subquery reads: what a 
name falls back to is what the
+     * scope that answered for it holds, so a scope that does not read the 
table holds nothing for the name
+     * and one of its own is one the change never reached. The other is a 
column of the table the change is
+     * about, which decides the rows only when the subquery's output is one 
the query reads: an EXISTS tests
+     * the rows of its subquery and not what it projects, so a name it 
projects and never compares is one
+     * this view's rows do not depend on.
+     *
+     * <p>Each scope is read on its own. A subquery inside one of these is a 
scope of its own, and it is
+     * judged where it is read and not as a part of its enclosing one: its 
projection is held only where
+     * that scope's own output is read, so an EXISTS inside an IN is still not 
compared by the IN.
+     */
+    private static boolean reachesAnyColumnOfASubquery(Plan plan, Set<String> 
names,
+            BaseTableInfo baseTableInfo) {
+        for (LogicalApply<?, ?> apply : 
plan.<LogicalApply>collectToList(LogicalApply.class::isInstance)) {
+            List<Plan> itsOwnScope = ownScopeOf(apply);
+            boolean outputDecidesRows = !apply.isExist();
+            boolean isOneOfItsTables = readsAnyTableOf(itsOwnScope, 
baseTableInfo);
+            for (Plan node : itsOwnScope) {
+                for (Expression expression : node.getExpressions()) {
+                    if ((isOneOfItsTables && 
readsAnyNameTheSubqueryAnswersFor(expression, names))

Review Comment:
   Confirmed as over-invalidation, and not fixed here. Measured: the view is 
invalidated and loses its snapshot while `d.flag` goes on reading the derived 
constant and every row of the query is the same.
   
   The name is matched because the scope answers for it out of something of its 
own -- a value it computed -- and the read is not asked what it is for. An 
EXISTS is where that matters most, and the code already asks it for a column of 
the changed table: the read of one is gated on the subquery's output being read 
(`outputDecidesRows`), because a predicate tests the rows its subquery has and 
not the values it names. Extending the same gate to the names a scope answers 
for itself is a candidate for its own change rather than a line added here, 
since it is the distinction the threads around this one keep turning on.
   



-- 
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